LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, 



Cijajt. ... inptjriS^ 

Shelf..'.... 



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 



Occasional Essays 



BY THE 

RT. REV. FRANCIS SILAS CHATARD, D.D. 

BISHOP OF VINCENNES. 




I894. 

CATHOLIC PUBLICATION SOCIETY CO. 
New York. 




Copyright, 1894, 
FRANCIS SILAS CHATARD. 



PREFACE 



J T is now twenty-five years, since, encouraged by the 
* kind words of Very Rev. Father Hecker, I first put 
pen to paper to write for the public. During that time, 
as circumstances permitted, I sent to the Catholic World, 
and to some other periodicals, articles on various subjects 
of current interest, with a view to keeping informed the 
young men of America, especially, of what it seemed to 
me important they should know. And, as the truth and 
the interests of the Church were what I sought to have 
them appreciate, I have judged it useful still to have the 
same things recalled to the mind of my former readers, 
and placed before the eyes of those who are now the 
young men of our country, as embodying a great deal 
which seems to me of the very first importance. With 
these few words of explanation, I publish this volume of 
occasional essays, submitting what I have written and my- 
self, as I hope they will always in like manner do, to the 
judgment and correction, if need be, of Holy Mother 
Church. 

*f* Francis Silas Chatard, 

Bishop of Vincennes. 

Indianapolis, Indiana. 
March, 1894. 





OCCASIONAL ESSAYS 






CONTENTS 








page 


I. 


The True Origin of Gallicanism, 


9 


II. 


The Vatican Council, - 


4 1 


III. 


Letter from Rome. (Oct., 1870) 


u 1 


IV. 


Letter from Rome. (Jan., i 87 1 ) 


75 


V. 


The Italian Guarantees and the Sover- 






eign Pontiff, - - - - 


07 


VI. 


Max Muller's Chips, -■ 


98 


VII. 


St. Peter's Roman Pontificate, 


, -, c 
I ID 


T r I T T 

v ill. 


College Education, - 


H3 


T "V 
IX. 


Catholic Societies, - 


I DO 


X. 


The Frequency of Suicide, 


102 


XI. 


Darwin's Mistake, ... - 


194 


XII. 


Herbert Spencer's Enigma, 


212 


XIII. 


The Encyclical " Immortale Dei," 


223 


XIV. 


Tenure of Land and Eminent Domain, 


232 


XV. 


Temporal Power and the Papacy, 


255 



6 



Contents. 



PAGE 

XVI. Can there be such a Thing as a Miracle ? 269 

XVII. The Temporal Power of the Pope, - 283 
XVIII. Are Catholics Right ? (On the School 

Question), - - - - 291 

XIX. Human Certitude and Divine Faith, 309 

XX. Total Abstinence, - 323 

XXI. Total Abstinence, - - 331 

XXII. Total Abstinence, - 338 

XXIII. The Brute-Soul, - - - 345 

XXIV. Brahmanism does not Antedate the Mo- 

saic Writings, - 354 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



I. 



THE TRUE ORIGIN OF GALLICANISM. 



{The Catholic World, January, 1870.) 



CURIOUS book* has lately appeared in France. 



A It is not so much the production of the pen as 
the result of the judicious industry of M. Gerin, judge 
of the civil tribunal of Paris. In his introduction to 
the work he says that it is not his intention to write a 
book, but to put together materials for history and for 
the better understanding of a vital question, which has 
agitated the French world especially for three hundred 
years — the infallibility of the sovereign pontiff and his 
superiority to a general council of bishops. It would 
be difficult to exaggerate the speculative value as well 
as the practical importance of this doctrine. M. Gerin 
has rendered an inestimable service to historic truth 
and to the church by showing the origin of the so- 
called Gallican doctrine, which denied the infallibility 
of the pontiff, contrary to the practice and opinion 
that had prevailed among Christians for fifteen or six- 
teen hundred years. It is not our intention to prove 

* Recherches Historiqices sur V Assetnblee die Clerge de France de 1682. 
Par Charles Gerin, Juge au Tribunal Civil de la Seine. Paris : Lecoffre, 




1869. 



9 



IO 



The True Origin 



the possessive or prescriptive right of this doctrine. 
This has been amply done in our day in English by 
several authors, while the work of the brothers Ballerini, 
and Zaccharia's reply to Hontheim, the well-known 
Anti-Febronius, are open to the study of the learned. 
What we shall do will be to follow M. Gerin in 
showing the base origin of a teaching which no array 
of brilliant names can make legitimate. 

At the outset we acknowledge the difficulty of the 
task. The work is so tersely and so logically compiled 
that one is at a loss how to break in upon so connected 
a recital, lest it should impair the effect of what he 
selects, by detaching it from its antecedents as well as 
from its consequents. But as all may not, at least for 
some time, have it in their power to read a translation 
of this interesting volume, we shall risk something for 
their information. 

It has been commonly supposed that the Gallican 
doctrine was generally held by the French clergy dur- 
ing the reign of Louis XIV., and that in ordering it 
to be taught throughout his kingdom that sovereign 
only seconded the desire of his prelates and people. 
Never has a more unfounded idea been foisted upon 
credulity. No one ever heard of any such doctrine 
before the Chancellor Gerson at the Council of Con- 
stance hesitatingly broached it, in order to apply it, if 
possible, as a remedy and preventive of schism in the 
church. Like all opinions not well ventilated and ex- 
amined, it found some who favored it, and at the schis- 
matical assembly of Basle it acquired a number of fol- 
lowers. These, however, were soon obliged to yield ; 
and in the Council of Florence a dogmatic decree was 



of Gallicanism. 



drawn up and adopted by the fathers, and confirmed 
by the sovereign pontiff, which declared the latter to be 
possessed of the full and supreme jurisdiction of Peter, 
and the doctor or teacher of the universal church — a 
phrase that implied the infallibility of the pope; for a 
teacher is rightly so called only when he possesses the 
principles of his branch in such a way as to impart the 
degree of certainty peculiar to it. The church possesses 
the assistance of Christ, and is, therefore, infallible ; 
and the organ or teacher of that church must have that 
same assistance which shall make him infallible. Other- 
wise we would have the, to say the least, strange con- 
sequence that ordinarily the church is liable to be mis- 
led ; extraordinarily only — for councils must from their 
nature be unusual — is she to be regarded as free from 
error. It should be borne in mind that this definition 
of the oecumenical synod, A.D. 1439, was made after 
due consultation ; for when Eugenius IV. had caused 
his rights and prerogatives to be discussed before him 
by the Greek and Latin theologians, the Greeks, on 
leaving the presence of the pontiff, went to the em- 
peror of Constantinople, then in Florence, and renewed 
before him the examination of the question. The result 
was, that they did not oppose the teaching of the papal 
doctors, but merely required two rights for their party : 
one, that no council should be called without the em- 
peror; and the other, that in case of appeal the patri- 
archs should not be obliged to present themselves for 
judgment, but that legates should be sent into the 
province in question to try the cause. Not a word was 
said against the doctrines. The pope refused to grant 
these requests, and the emperor broke off negotiations. 



I 2 



The True Origin 



Still, through the mediation of influential prelates on 
both sides, they were resumed again immediately ; and 
the Greek fathers acknowledged the Roman pontiff 
" locum gerentem et vicarium Christi, pastorem et doc- 
torem omnium Christianorum, regentem et gubernantem 
Dei Ecclesiam " — to hold the place of Christ and to be 
his vicar, the pastor and doctor of all Christians, the 
ruler and head of the church. A few days afterward, 
the formal dogmatic definition was given by the united 
fathers of both churches, confirmed by the pope, and 
subscribed by him, by the cardinals, the emperor John 
Palasologus, and the Greek and Latin fathers of the 
council, with the exception of one, Mark, Bishop of 
Ephesus, whose bad faith in quoting the Greek manu- 
scripts was accidentally made known to the whole 
council. His servant had erased the wrong passage, 
which fact the bishop did not discover until he was 
reading the code in public. The words of the defini- 
tion are these : 

" We define that the holy apostolic see and the Roman pontiff 
hold the primacy throughout the whole world; that the same 
Roman pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter, prince of the apos- 
tles, and the true vicar of Christ, the head of the whole church, and 
the father and doctor of all Christians; that to him, in blessed 
Peter, was given by our Lord Jesus Christ full power to feed, rule, 
and govern the universal church, as is contained, also, in the acts of 
oecumenical councils and in the sacred canons." 

It was impossible for Gallican theologians to ignore 
the force of these words. To elude it they had 
recourse to the last phrase, "as is contained in the 
acts of oecumenical councils and in the sacred canons," 
and appealed to tradition to explain the meaning of 



of Gallicanism. 



13 



the fathers of Florence. Their meaning, however, is 
clear from what they determined on a few days before 
the decision. In their written declaration that phrase 
is not found. Moreover, the phrase itself is in corrob- 
oration of the decision ; for in reality tradition bears 
out fully the doctrine it contains. The Greek text of 
Cardinal Bessarion has this phrase, lead 6v rponov — 
" according to the manner" — and it is this that the 
Gallic doctors thought favored them. This wording 
does not, however, alter the sense we have given. With 
regard to the phrase itself, learned men, and among 
them the author of Anti-Febronius, state that in the 
original document such an appendage had no existence 
whatsoever.* With this decision before them, how did 
it happen that such teaching as at a later date ob- 
tained the ascendency in France, and in some other 
parts of Europe, could have met with favor ? The 
work of M. Gerin answers this question clearly, and 
shows that intrigue and royal influence and power did 
the work. 

The documents with which he opens his collection 
refer to the year 1663. They, for the most part, have 
hitherto been entirely unknown, and were found by M. 
Gerin among the MSS. of the time of Louis XIV. in 
the Bibliotheque Imperiale — MSS. Colbert. At that 
time ill-humor existed between the French and Papal 
courts, growing out of a quarrel between the servants 
of the French ambassador at Rome and the Corsican 
guard. This was settled for the moment ; but on the 

* Text of Abram Candiotto. The original text, preserved at Florence, 
signed by the sovereign pontiff, by Palaeologus, etc., and officially sealed, has 
quemddmodum etiam, etc. 



14 



The True Origin 



appointment of the Due de Crequi, the feuds were 
renewed, owing to the disposition of that ambassador, 
whose pride had been wounded by his having been 
obliged to pay the first visits to the relatives of the 
pope, who were in the first places of the government. 
The retainers of the duke, on the 12th of August, 1662, 
attacked and beat the Corsican guard in the service of 
the pope. The pope sent an envoy to visit the duke, 
who pretended that an attempt had been made on his 
life. Instead of receiving the messenger of the pontiff 
graciously, he threatened to throw him out of the win- 
dow, and refused all apologies. This was a spark 
thrown into other inflammable matter that brought on an 
invasion of the papal territory, and other still worse 
disasters to the church. The king, as a consequence of 
his difficulties with the pope, became surrounded with 
evilly- disposed counsellors, whom, to do him justice, he 
sometimes curbed. It was during this political trouble 
that the enemies of Rome sought to deal her a blow 
fatal to her influence. The Jansenist opinions had re- 
ceived a severe condemnation in the decrees of the 
sovereign pontiff and through the action of Louis XIV. 
Those who professed them were obliged to sign a for- 
mula of submission to the church, and receive the doc- 
trine of Rome. There were many who, while they did 
so, still held to the erroneous teachings of their sect. 
Among these there was an Abbe Bourseis, a man of 
some ability, but of more tact in courtly life. In 1661, 
on the 12th of December, a bachelor of theology de- 
fended the following thesis : 

" We acknowledge Christ head of the church in such a manner 
that he, on ascending to heaven, intrusted the government of it first 



of Gallicanism. 



15 



to Peter, and afterward to his successors, and gave them the same 
infallibility he himself possessed, whenever they should speak 
authoritatively {ex cathedra). There is, therefore, in the Roman 
church, an infallible judge of controversy regarding faith, even 
apart from general councils, in questions both of right and of fact." 

The Abbe Bourseis seized upon this opportunity and 
gained over the minister Colbert ; while the son of the 
minister Letellier brought over his father. The thesis 
was represented as an attempt of the Jesuits against 
the government. About the same time, Drouet de 
Villeneuve, a bachelor of the College of Navarre, 
defended the same doctrine in substance. The advo- 
cate-general was instructed to proceed in the case. 
The parliament having been informed of what had 
occurred, issued a decree against the thesis, on the 
22d of January, 1663, forbidding any one to write, 
hold, or teach such propositions under penalty of being 
proceeded against by the courts ; and commanded this 
decree to be placed on the register of the said faculty 
of Paris. The parliament deputed two counsellors of 
the court, and Achille de Harlay, the substitute of the 
procur ear- general, to have the decree registered. These 
persons repaired to the Sorbonne on the 31st January, 
1663. " Despite the menaces addressed to the indocile 
doctors, by Talon, the advocate-general, and Harlay, 
the faculty refused to obey; and only agreed to take 
the matter into consideration."* M. de Mince and M. 
de Breda, favorable to the government, said the faculty 
had not changed its sentiments and did not approve the 

* There is, in a secret report made to Colbert, " Memoir regarding what 
passed in the faculty with respect to the thesis," a curious account, hitherto 
unknown, of these debates. — MSS. Cinq Cents, Colbert, vol. 155. 



i6 



The True Origin 



thesis. No conclusion was come to ; the discussion was 
adjourned to the 1st. Nothing, however, was done on 
the ist nor on the 5 th of February. On the 9th, the 
Archbishops of Auch and of Paris were present. The 
first spoke against the decree and action of the parlia- 
ment ; the second said no opposition should be made to 
the decree, but that the faculty would be able to arrange 
things in a satisfactory manner if they discussed the 
matter amicably with the first president of the parlia- 
ment. The Archbishop of Auch said that general coun- 
cils were necessary only against schism ; the rest, against 
heresy as well as schism, but for nothing else. No con- 
clusion was reached. On the 15th of February, M. de 
Breda reported, and read the answer of the first presi- 
dent, and, hearing a great uproar, said he was astonished 
to see those present so excited against the parliament. 
M. Grandin, syndic of the faculty, to justify himself for 
having signed the thesis, spoke for a long time, and 
tried to give a good meaning to the thesis, and ex- 
plained the third proposition, touching the need of gen- 
eral councils, in the same way as the Archbishop of 
Auch. M. de Mince wished the decree registered. M. 
Morel thought it ought not to be registered before the 
thesis had been censured. He quoted some text of St. 
Gregory Nazianzen, adding that, if it were registered, 
the faculty would be like the statue of Memnon. He 
was followed in his opinion by M. Amiot. The Rev. 
P. Nicolai, MM. Bail, Joisel, Chamillard, and all the doc- 
tors of St. Sulpice, and of the house of Chardonnet, were 
of the same opinion, and declaimed strongly against the 
harangue of the substitute, Achille de Harlay. M. Les- 
tocq, professor of the Sorbonne, wished to prove the 



of Galiicanism. 



17 



decree null both in matter and form. M. Chamillard 
the younger said the council of Constance was not re- 
ceived, and that its doctrine was only probable ; but the 
greater part of the doctors having risen against him, he 
was obliged to say it had been received in part. M. 
Bossuet* here made a feint of bringing forward a new 
project ; upon which Leblond, professor of the Sorbonne, 
Bonst, also professor, Joisel and Blanger, of the Sor- 
bonne, following the advice of the Pere Nicolai, left 
their places in an indignant manner, saying that the 
harangue of the substitute ought to be censured. All 
the professors of the Sorbonne, without exception, the 
fathers Louvet and Hermant, Bernardines and professors 
in their house, spoke bitterly against the parliament ; 
and when the Pere Hermant undertook to prove the 
infallibility of the pope and his superiority over a coun- 
cil, he was followed by nearly all the monks. 

On the 15th, MM. Pignay, Bail, Nicolai, Chaillon, 
dean of Beauvais, Joisel, and all the professors of the 
Sorbonne without exception, as also MM. Magnay and 
Charton, opposed the registering. 

The chief instructor of the bachelor Villeneuve, the 
Abbe de Tilloy, who had signed the thesis, and M. 
Joisel, wished the decree registered with the explana- 
tions of M. Grandin. M. Leblond, professor of the 
Sorbonne, and M. Lestocq concluded that it was agreed 
on that the registering should be accepted with these 
explanations. M. Guyard, of Navarre, said that to do 
so was to accuse the good faith of those who had 
drawn up the conclusion, which had passed by advice 



* Afterward Bishop of Meaux. 



i8 



The True Origin 



of MM. de Mince and de Breda. The Rev. Fathers 
de la Barmondiere and Leblanc, of St. Sulpice, accused 
the faculty of mortal sin, and the latter said it was 
through cowardice and fear of the temporal power that 
the decree was registered. M. Cornet, the head pro- 
fessor of Navarre, was not present at these assemblies. 

At the end of this memoir are the list of doctors 
who took part in the discussions, and confidential notes 
regarding each of the members of the faculty. 

"List of doctors who have acted badly, or are suspected, on the 
subject of the decree of the parliament (that is, opposed the king). 



"Doctors who have acted well on this same occasion, and who 
particularly distinguished themselves (that is, favored the king). 



MM. 



MM. 
Amiot, 
Rouille, 

Alleaume de Tilloy, 

Demure, 

Magnet, 

Ouatrehommes, 

Bossuet, 

De la Barmondiere, 
Leblanc, 

Dez de Fontaine, 
Bail, 

Du Fournel, 
De Pinteville. 



Cornet, 

Grandin, professor, 
De Lestocq, " 
Chamillard, " 
Leblond, 
Bonst, " 
Desperier, 
Joisel, 

Chamillard, brother of the 



professor, 
Pignay, 
Morel, 
Charton, 
Gobinet, 



MM. 

De Mince, cure de Gonesse 



MM. 



De Breda, cure de St. Andre 



— very well. 



Vaillant, 

Faure, 

Fortin, 



— admirably, 
Duzon, 



Cocquelin, 
Caspin." 



of Gallicanism. 



19 



" SKETCH OF THE DOCTORS WHO HAVE ACTED BADLY OR ARE 
SUSPECTED. 

" Before making remarks on these gentlemen, I protest sincerely 
that I consider them all good men, full of true ecclesiastical zeal, 
but, to my mind, in this affair not bearing themselves according to 
knowledge. 

" M. Cornet,* a fine mind, a very able man, of irreproachable life, 
with so great a reputation among those of his party that he is their 
head beyond dispute, and the soul of their deliberations. Those 
most attached to him are MM. Grandin, Chamillard, and Morel — 
the first two with more reserve and management, the last more openly 
and frankly. 

"Nothing can be expected from the Carmelites, Augustinians, and 
Franciscans" 

"COMMUNITIES TO BE FEARED ON THIS OCCASION. 

"That of the Jesuits under the Pere Bazot. 

"That of St. Sulpice, where, to tell the truth, ecclesiastics are 
educated in a spirit of perfect regularity ; but we are assured that 
every one there is extremely in favor of the papal authority. 

"That of St. Nicolas du Chardonnet. 

"That known as the Trente-Trois, at the Hotel d'Albiac, near the 
College of Navarre, under M. Charton. 
"That of M. Gilot. 

"There are several devots who aid these in a work which good 
Frenchmen and true subjects of the king strive to prevent. The 
principal are MM. Dalbon, De la Motte Fenelon, and M. d'Abely, 
named for the bishopric of Rodez." 

The decree, says M. Gerin, was registered on the 4th 
of April ; but on the same day a thesis similar to the 
one it condemned was maintained, with the approbation 
of the syndic of the faculty, in the college of the Ber- 
nardines, by the Frere Laurent Desplantes. On the 
14th of April, in consequence of this being denounced 



* Bossuet's master. 



20 



The True Origin 



by royal agents, the parliament cited before it M. 
Grandin, the syndic, the professor presiding at the 
thesis, the disputant, and the superiors of the Bernar- 
dines. Talon, the advocate-general, spoke with great 
warmth. " Strange," he said in his prosecution, — 
" strange, that, with unexampled rashness, they have 
dared to renew these evil propositions on the very day 
the decree was registered in the faculty." Grandin held 
out against the storm, and the parliament suspended 
him from his duties. This rigor frightened the timid, 
and some days afterward the court received a num- 
ber of equivocal propositions, subscribed by sixty-six 
doctors only. The whole number was over seven hun- 
dred. M. Deslions, of the Sorbonne, in his MS. journal,* 
lets us into the secret of the way in which these six 
propositions were gotten up. They are as follows : 

" i. It is not the doctrine of the faculty that the sovereign pontiff 
has any authority over the temporal rights of the most Christian 
king ; on the contrary, the faculty always opposed those who favored 
that authority, even understood as indirect only. 

u 2. It is the doctrine of the faculty that the most Christian king 
acknowledges and has no superior at all in temporal matters except 
God; and this is its ancient doctrine, from which it will never recede. 

"3. It is the doctrine of the faculty that subjects owe fidelity and 
obedience to the most Christian king in such a way that they can be 
dispensed from them under no pretext. 

"4. It is the doctrine of the faculty that they neither approve nor 
have approved any proposition, contrary to the authority of the most 
Christian king, or to the genuine (germanis) liberties of the Gallican 
Church and canons received in the realm, v. g., that the sovereign 
pontiff can depose bishops in despite of these canons. 

* Bib. Imp. — MS. Sorbonne, 1258. 



of Gallicanism. 



2 I 



" 5. It is not the doctrine of the faculty that the sovereign pontiff 
is above an oecumenical council. 

"6. It is not the doctrine of the faculty that the sovereign pontiff 
is infallible if no consent of the church support him (nullo accedente 
ecclesics consensic ) . " 

With regard to these propositions, M. Deslions writes : 

" M. Bouthillier, doctor of the Sorbonne, and later member of the 
assembly of 1682, and Bishop of Troyes, told me that, in the con- 
ference held among the doctors deputed to draw up the six articles 
presented to the king on the part of the Sorbonne, in the first article, 
which concerns the deposition of kings, the phrase ' on no pretext ' 
(nullo pratextu), was purposely inserted ; and that thereupon some 
one objected the case of heresy. M. Morel then said that this would 
be a reason, and not a simple pretext, for deposing a king. He told 
me, also, that he had seen in the MS. of M. Grandin, at the sixth 
article, that the pope is not infallible if some kind of consent of the 
church do not support him. They resolved to put instead of this, if 
110 consent support him; which is the same thing, and in some way 
less even. So true is it that these articles were drawn up in the most 
equivocal language the framers could suitably employ. M. Bouthil- 
lier learned this of M. Gobinet, one of the deputies." 

In confirmation of this, M. Gerin quotes a comment 
on these articles made by Pinsson, advocate of the 
parliament, by order of Colbert. He qualifies all the 
propositions as equivocal or captious. He says : 

" 1. This first proposition is captious; it should have been 
general, affirmative, specific, etc. 

" 2. The king did not need the avowal of the faculty to prove 
that he knows no superior in temporal matters, this avowal being 
much more advantageous to the popes themselves, who have 
recognized it, as does Pope Innocent III., cap. Per venerabilem, in 
the decretals. 

"3. This repetition too often made of the words ' most Christian 



22 



The True Origin 



king ' was unnecessary for Frenchmen, and it would have been less 
suspicious and more advantageous if, in speaking of the king, they 
had given to him no title, etc. 

" 4. This fourth is equivocal and suspicious, etc. 

''5. The affectation of framing the fifth article in negative expres- 
sions cannot but be suspicious, etc. 

" 6. The last article should not have been conceived in negative 
terms, but in affirmative ; to wit, that the pope of himself is not 
infallible without the consent of the universal church. And the 
phrase, 'If no consent of the church support him,' is too equivocal 
in this place," etc. 

The offer, in the name of the faculty, of these proposi- 
tions put a stop to the difficulty for the time, and the 
settlement of the question of redress so unjustifiably 
and tyrannically urged by Louis XIV. against the holy 
see brought with it an external appearance of peace, 
while it left a rankling wound that was to break out 
afresh in the contests concerning the regale, or so-styled 
" royal perquisite," seventeen years later. 

" This question of the regale" says M. Gerin, " was 
of a date much anterior to the time of Louis XIV." It 
consisted in the vindication by the crown of a presumed 
title to the revenues of certain dioceses, and to the 
nomination of persons to hold benefices in the same, 
upon the death or removal of the bishop, and until the 
newly nominated bishop had taken the oath of fealty, 
and had registered it in the chancellor's chamber, this 
act being styled the closure of the royal right, or 
regale. The Council of Lyons had authorized this cus- 
tom with regard to bishoprics in which it had been 
established as a conditon in their foundation, or had 
existed as an ancient practice ; while it expressly 



of Gallicanism. 



23 



forbade its introduction with respect to those dioceses 
in which it had not been received. 

" The parliaments undertook, however, to make the custom one 
of universal application, compelling the dioceses claiming exemption 
to prove their title to be free from it. 

" Henry IV. by an edict of 1606, art. 27, declared, ' We do not 
intend to enjoy the right of royal perquisite {regale) save in the 
manner in which we and our predecessors have done, without 
extending it further to the prejudice of churches exempt from it.' 
This edict was registered in the parliament of Paris without modi- 
fication ; but on the 24th of August, 1608, the same parliament 
pronounced a decree conceived in these terms : ' The court declares 
the king to have a right to the royal perquisite from the church 
of Belley, as from every other in his kingdom;' and forbidding 
advocates to put forward any proposition to the contrary. The 
clergy complained to the king, who by letters of 1609 yielded the 
execution of the decree. Louis XIII. seemed favorable to the rights 
of the church ; but after the accession of Louis XIV. these rights 
were menaced more than ever, and 1 there was no assembly of 
the clergy,' particularly after the year 1638, in which a special com- 
mission was not named to attend to the subject of royal perquisite.' " * 

That of 1670 presented a remonstrance to the king 
through the Archbishop of Embrun ; but in 1673 and 
1675, two royal declarations appeared to the effect 
that all the churches of the kingdom were subject to 
the right of royal perquisite ; and that the archbishops 
and bishops who had not yet closed it by registering 
their oath should go through that formality within six 
months. 

Caulet, Bishop of Pamiers, and Pavilion, Bishop of 
Alet, standing on their rights as secured by the custom 
of exemption, and by the canons of the general Council 

* Proces Verbatix du Clerge, 1. v., p. 377, sq. 



24 



The True Origin 



of Lyons, refused to obey. The result was a contest 
between the civil and ecclesiastical powers, in which 
Rome of necessity became engaged. Unheard-of harsh- 
ness, and cruelty even, were used against the clergy- 
men who opposed the government. One vicar-general 
was condemned to death. Unhappily, there were many 
ecclesiastics, who had been provided with benefices by 
the government, who not only took sides with it, but, 
being interested, were active in keeping up a quarrel 
the resolution of which, in accordance with the views of 
Rome, would have proved ruinous to them. They sold 
Christ for a few pieces of money. The deputies of the 
clergy in 1680, in their regular quinquennial assembly, 
at the request of Louis XIV., wrote a flattering letter in 
favor of his claims and against the pope. This caused 
Madame de Sevigne to criticise them caustically. When 
speaking of the two prelates mentioned above, she 
says, after referring to the then Bishop of Alet, who 
had succeeded Pavilion, " But the shade of his saintly 
predecessor, and M. de Pamiers — have they signed that 
letter of flattery? " 

But what were the means used to bring about the 
assembly of 1682, in which the four articles of which so 
much has been said were framed ? That which we have 
recounted up to this was only the preparation of the 
soil ; the seed was now to be sown, and fostered with 
all the care of royal interest. M. Gerin quotes from 
the Proces Verbanx du Clerge, t. v. 

" The general agents or procurators of the clergy " (these agents 
resided permanently in Paris to protect the interests of the church 
in case of collision with the state, or in matters partly ecclesiastical 
and partly secular) "were counselled to present a memorial to 



of Gallicanism. 



25 



the king, and to pray his majesty to allow them to call together 
the prelates who were in Paris, on business connected with their 
churches, in order that through their singular prudence they might 
find means to restore peace and put everything in order. The king 
having permitted this assembly, it was held during the months of 
March and of May, 1681, in the archiepiscopal palace of Paris." 

It is humiliating to a Catholic to have to make the 
avowal, but it is well known that royal patronage had 
well-nigh ruined the French Church, and that not a few 
bishops unworthy of the name occupied high and in- 
fluential places. This assembly, known as u the Little 
Assembly " {La Petite Assembled), met the day after the 
order was given. Fifty bishops, of whom the great 
majority ought to have been at their posts of duty, were 
basking in the sunshine of royal favor, and it was these 
Louis XIV. called on for advice. Racine has a sarcastic 
epigram on them, which M. Gerin quotes : 

" Un ordre, hier venu de S. Germain, 
Veut qu'on s'assemble ; on s'assemble demain : 
Notre archeveque et cinquante-deux autres, 
Successeurs des apotres, 

S'y trouveront. Or, de savoir quel cas 
S'y traitera, c'est encore un mystere. 

C'est seulement chose tres claire 
Que nous avions cinquante-deux prelats 

Qui ne residaient pas." 

The advice these prelates gave was what might have 
been expected from the state of things at the time. 

They indorsed the action of the government on four 
points of discussion with the holy see : 

1. The royal perquisite, which Fleury and Bossuet 
could not approve. 



26 



The True Origin 



2. The book of the Abbe Gerbais, censured by Rome 
as schismatical, suspected of heresy, and injurious to 
the holy see ; but which they found full of good doc- 
trine and of deep learning. 

3. In the affair of Charonne. This was a case of 
exemption from royal nomination in which the king 
had violated that right. The religious women of the 
convent of Charonne, near Paris, which belonged to 
the Augustinian rule, enjoyed the privilege, recognized 
by the civil power, of electing every three years their 
superior. Louis XIV., however, in 1676, named for 
their superior a Cistercian nun, whom the Archbishop 
of Paris, Harlay de Champvallon, acknowledged, and 
to whom he gave the position. The religious appealed 
to the sovereign pontiff, who, by a brief, dated August 
7th, 1680, annulled the act of the archbishop, and 
ordered them to proceed to the triennial election, and 
take for their superior one of their own number. 

4. In the affair of the diocese of Pamiers, of which 
we have spoken above. 

" On the 2d of May the assembly resolved to ask the king to call 
a national council, or general assembly of the clergy, composed of 
two deputies of the first order and two of the second from each 
province, the latter to have a consulting voice only. The other 
details were to be arranged according to the advice of the commis- 
saries." * 

The action of this assembly was much criticised and 
was disapproved by the people, as can be seen, ac- 
cording to M. Gerin's statement, in the MSS. of St. 

* MSS. 9517ft. Bibl. Imp. 



of Gallicanism. 



2 7 



Sulpice, i. ii. iii. ; Bibl. Mazarine, MSS. 2392, 2398 fr. 
From these he makes several long and interesting 
extracts. 

In consequence of this resolution of the Little Assembly, 
" the king, on the 16th of July, 168 1, addressed letters of 
convocation to the agents of the clergy, through whom 
the archbishops of the territory subject to his majesty 
were charged to hold provincial assemblies and cause to 
be chosen two deputies of the first order, and two of the 
second, for the general assembly assigned for the 1st of 
October, 1681." 

Before entering upon a history of this body, M. Gerin 
gives a clear idea of the question at issue between the 
king and the pontiff, and shows that it was of the same 
nature as that which caused the struggle, in which the 
church was finally victorious, between Gregory VII. and 
the German emperor, Henry IV. The appointment of 
proper pastors for the flock was at stake. Rome sought 
likewise to put a stop to the abuse by which laymen were 
pensioned on dioceses, whose funds ought to have been 
devoted to supplying the spiritual wants of the people, 
and relieving the poor and orphans. The church was in 
imminent danger of servitude, spiritual and temporal, as 
Fleury himself states. So far had the usurpation of 
ecclesiastical jurisdiction gone that, when Louis XIV., at 
Strasburg, gave audience to the bishop of that place, the 
act of the king in putting his hand on the crozier of the 
prelate as he leant forward to hear him was interpreted as 
a resumption of investiture by the ring and crozier. 
Pelisson, however, the intimate friend of the king, tells us 
this was not the case, as he heard him say afterward that 
such an idea had not occurred to him ; but as the prelate 



28 



The True Origin 



spoke in a rather low tone, he bent toward him and leaned 
for support on the crozier. 

The government of Louis had wished this assembly for 
its own ends ; it was therefore determined that nothing 
should be left undone to secure a favorable result. The 
temper of all the members of the French hierarchy was 
known : there were some who were feared — these were to 
be passed by ; some who were doubted — these were to be 
allured to compliance ; others there were whose worldly 
spirit and indebtedness to the crown left no uncertainty 
as to their course — these were to be put forward, honored, 
and made the leaders in the movement against Rome. 
Colbert, ably seconded by the worldly Harlay de Champ- 
vallon, Archbishop of Paris, set about the work. His 
master was all-powerful ; everything but true virtue was 
to bend before him. Canonical forms were to be super- 
seded if found to be trammels, and persons who contra- 
dicted were to be made to feel the weight of royal dis- 
pleasure. The legislative bodies even had been reduced 
to a state of passive instrumentality, so that, in 1672, a 
conscientious bishop of Languedoc complained to Colbert 
that votes were given without discussion, and protested 
that explanations should be made in regard to the 
advantages or the necessity of the expenses the states 
were called on to vote. In this state of things the Little 
Assembly had been convened and had acted the part we 
have seen. Before closing its sessions it named a com- 
mission under the presidency of Harlay, without whose 
bidding it was to do nothing. This commission drew up 
the project of procuration, and, by order of the king, no 
mention was made of the part he had had in it. On the 
1 6th of June, 1 681, Colbert writes to the archbishop : 



of Gallicanism. 



29 



" Sir : You will find accompanying this a copy of the letter of the 
king, as approved by his majesty, for the convocation of the general 
assembly of the clergy, in which you will remark that no mention is 
made of the plan of procuration, placed by you in my hands. His 
majesty has thought that nothing should appear as coming from him 
that might determine the matters to be acted on in the said assem- 
blage ; but he has resolved to give orders on this subject by word of 
mouth to the general agents of the clergy, and to direct that this 
project or plan of procuration be sent to the archbishops, with the 
explanation that it has been drawn up by commissioners named at 
the late assembly, for the purpose of being sent to all parts ; to make 
known what ought to be treated of in the said assembly, and to bring 
about uniformity of powers ; and in order to cause the provincial 
assemblies to give powers of procuration to the deputies of the 
general assembly, conformably to the project, his majesty will direct 
that the intendants of provinces be written to, to command them to 
impart to the archbishops his intentions on the subject of the procu- 
ration." 

M. Gerin gives us here the text of this plan of procura- 
tion ; it is from a MS. annotated by the procureur general 
De Harlay, brother of the archbishop. The deputies are 

"To repair to the said city of Paris, according to the letters of the 
king and of the said agents, and there deliberate, in the manner 
contained in the resolution of the said assemblies of March and May, 
(the Little Assembly,) on the means of reconciling the variances 
respecting the royal right of perquisite [regale) between the pope, 
on the one side, and the king on the other ; to determine on all the 
acts which they shall deem necessary to put an end to these vari- 
ances, with the deputies of other provinces, the same to sign the 
clauses and conditions that the assembly shall judge fitting ; they 
are likewise charged and expressly commanded to employ all proper 
means to repair the infractions committed by the court of Rome in 
the decrees of the concordat de causis et de frivolis aftfiellationibus 
in the affairs ofCharonne, of Pamiers, of Toulouse, and others which 
may have or shall have transpired ; to preserve the jurisdiction of 
the ordinaries of the realm, and the various degrees of it in the form 
sanctioned by the concordat ; to cause the pope, in case of appeal to 



30 



The True Origin 



Rome, to depute commissaries in France to judge it : to procure by 
all sorts of due and proper means, the preservation of the maxims 
and liberties of the Gallican Church: to pass the resolutions by a 
plurality of votes, and, for the reasons explained above, to frame all 
acts that shall be required, even though there be any thing demand- 
ing a more special commission than is contained in these presents, 
promise being given that all that shall have been granted and signed 
by them shall be agreed to and observed inviolably in every partic- 
ular, according to its form and tenor." 

The government foresaw that the second order of the 
clergy;, the simple priests, would make an attempt to vin- 
dicate their right to a voice. For this reason it determined 
to have a precedent by which to act. The Archbishop of 
Rheims, who was in the interest of the government, con- 
voked his provincial assembly at Senlis ; the second order 
protested ; its voice was stifled, and the plan of procura- 
tion accepted. An account of the proceedings was made 
out and sent to the king, by whose command copies were 
immediately transmitted to the intendants of the kingdom 
with orders to instruct the archbishops to do the same 
in like cases.* As for the choice of deputies, that was 
to be made without any appearance or direct proof of 
royal intervention. But the names of the deputies show 
the pressure that must have been brought to bear by the 
court. M. Gerin quotes here a number of documents in 
which the royal interference is manifest. Thus Colbert 
writes to the Archbishop of Rouen : 

F N T AIXEBLEATJ, Sept. 21, l68l. 

" The king, being persuaded that the Bishop of Lisieux can be of 
more use in the next assembly than any other of your suffragans, his 
majesty has ordered me to write you that you will please have him 
chosen,"' etc. 



~ P. 12S. fie le::er c:r.vey:ng :he Dr. 



of Gallicanism. 



3i 



From page 115 to 153 M. Gerin demonstrates this 
pressure unanswerably; and from page 153 to page 261 
he shows from the character of the persons chosen, the 
nature of the assembly, and its obsequiousness to the 
sovereign. On page 260 he asks : 

" Why were not seen there Mascaron, Flechier, Bourdaloue, Fen- 
elon, Huet, Mabillon, Thomassin, Ranee, Tronson, Brisacier, Ti- 
berge, La Salle, La Chetardie, and so many others, still more glori- 
ous in the sight of God than in that of men ? . . . . Cease then 
from saying that the assembly of 1682 was the elite of the clergy of 
the day ! " 

One of the most interesting features connected with 
the history of the assembly is the new phase put upon 
the part acted in it by the famous Bishop of Meaux — ■ 
Bossuet. His position here contradicts what we have 
seen him do in the year 1663. But from all the docu- 
ments M. Gerin brings forward, it is evident that he was 
drawn in against his will. In one place he writes : 

" The assembly is about to be held ; and they desire not only that 
I should be present, but that I should preach the introductory ser- 
mon." (Letter to the Abbe de Ranee.) 

Fleury in his notes says : 

" It was the will of the king that the Bishop of Meaux should be 
present." 

It is true that the articles were drawn up by him ; but 
it Was because he saw that extreme opinions were about 
to prevail, to prevent which he took the propositions into 
his hands, and did the best he could under the circum- 
stances. This, however, does not excuse him entirely; 
for there are times in which we should be ready to suffer 
for the cause of truth, and if necessary even to give our 



32 



The True Origin 



lives. The fault of Bossuet was, that he was weak, and 
could not resolve to forfeit royal favor for the glory of 
suffering in a just cause. After a careful and thorough 
perusal of the chapter on Bossuet and the assembly, it is 
impossible to come to any milder conclusion than this. 
The articles were drawn up and passed by the assembly. 
It is not our purpose to go into an examination of these 
articles. It will suffice to state that their aim was to 
limit that fulness of power belonging to the sovereign 
pontiff which we have seen implied in the definition of 
the Council of Florence, without seeming to do or say any- 
thing that could be noted as heretical or schismatical ; 
and in the third article there is an indorsement of the 
decrees of the fourth and fifth sessions of the Council of 
Constance, which it is well known were never approved 
by the sovereign pontiff, and have therefore no authority. 
These decrees proclaim the superiority of a general coun- 
cil of bishops over the pope, and strike a direct blow at 
his infallibility and supremacy. They were the very 
decrees that caused the decision of the Council of Flor- 
ence, though the occasion of the definition was the union 
of the Greek and Latin churches. How were these arti- 
cles received ? On the 19th of March they were adopted 
by the assembly. On the nth of April, Innocent XL 
censured them in his brief. Louis XIV. was so much 
impressed by this act of the pope that he prevented the 
bishops of the assembly from sending a circular to the 
prelates of the kingdom, by way of protest. On the 9th 
of May, he suspended the sessions of the assembly ; and 
on the 29th of June, he sent orders for its immediate 
dissolution, without allowing it to go through with the 
rest of its programme. Count de Maistre says of him, 



of Gallicanism. 



33 



" He broke up the assembly unceremoniously, with so 
much wisdom and fitness, that one almost pardons him 
for having called it together."* He did not even allow the 
minutes of the sessions to be put in the archives of the 
clergy.f M. Germ tells us that the people were opposed 
to this assembly from the outset ; and when the members 
were about to depart, the following epigram sped them 
on their way ; 

" Prelats, abbes, separez-vous ; 
Laissez un peu Rome et l'Eglise ! 
Un chacun se moque de vous, 
Et toute la cour vous meprise. 
Ma foi ! Ton vous ferait, avant qu'il fut un an, 
Signer a 1' Alcoran." 

The ministers of the king were very much irritated ; 
they dared not then, as they did in 1688, appeal to a 
general council, because this would bring upon them the 
censures of the bull Execrabilis of Pius II. It was deter- 
mined, therefore, by the king to permit the procureur- 
general to make a protest privately, in the hands of the 
greffier or keeper of the archives of the parliament, with- 
out the knowledge even of the first president. In the 
meanwhile the clergy, far from acquiescing in the decrees 
of a body which had falsely assumed to represent them, 
were giving evidence in a marked manner of their disap- 
probation. Like all those who try to compromise between 
right and wrong, between the service of God and the 
good- will of the world, the framers of the four articles 
had become unacceptable to both. 

" A Dio spiacenti ed ai nemici sui." 

* De PEglise Gallicane, t. ii., c. II. 
t Proces Verbaux, t. v. 



34 



The True Origin 



The parliament protested because the prelates had not 
gone far enough ; the procureur- general, De Harlay, put 
in a formal declaration on this subject, and it was regis- 
tered by permission of the king. But these men were not 
the clergy, not the people. M. Gerin gives us witnesses 
who testify to what these thought and said. The first is 
one above suspicion, a man favorable to the court, the 
Abbe Le Gendre ; he says : 

''At first the declaration of the clergy was by no means applauded. 
Far from doing so, many attributed it to cowardice, saying that it 
was the effect of the servile obedience of the bishops to the will of 
the court. Others thought it was neither prudent nor honorable to 
rise with levity against the pretensions of the pope, at a moment 
when he was risking everything to sustain theirs. This movement 
of opposition, which was almost general, gave birth to spicy writing, 
in which Mgr. De Harlay was the most ill-used, as he was regarded 
as the first inciter, and almost as the only author of all that was done 
in the assembly." 

The edict of the 30th of March ordered that the four 
articles should be registered in all the universities, and 
be taught by all the professors. If this doctrine, re- 
marks M. Gerin, had been but generally received, it 
would have been hailed with rejoicing. What happened ? 
It was opposed by the most numerous, the most learned, 
and the most pious portion of the clergy. The faculty 
of Paris was composed of seven hundred and fifty-three 
members, as appears from the MSS. Colbert, Mel. t. viL 
Of these, one hundred and sixty-nine belonged to the 
Sorbonne. The "Plan for Reforming the Faculty" in 
1683, (Pap. Harlay,) says, 

"The house of Sorbonne, with the exception of six or seven, have 
been educated in sentiments contrary to the declaration. The 



of Gallicanism, 



35 



professors, the syndic excepted, are so opposed to it that those even 
who are paid by the king have not been willing to teach any of the 

propositions presented to his majesty in 1663, etc 

The principal of the College of Plessis, and those whom he employs 
and protects, in his college and out of it, are absolutely one with 
those of Sorbonne." 

As to the College of Navarre, the MSS. Colbert, t. 
155, tell us that its principal, Professor Guyard, was 
entirely devoted to Rome, etc., and others prominent, 
Saussay, Ligny, Vinot, were of like opinion. In 1682, 
none of the professors except Doctor Lefevre taught the 
maxims of the kingdom.* 

Of St. Sulpice, St. Nico'las de Chardonnet, and the 
Missions Etrangeres, we read : 

" Those of St. Sulpice, of St. Nicolas de Chardonnet, and of the 
Missions Etrangeres, who have given their opinion in this affair, (of 
the four articles,) hold the same views as those of Sorbonne." 

Of the religious orders and communities, it was writ- 
ten in 1663 : 

" Nothing can be hoped for of the Carmelites, Augustinians, and 
Franciscans, who make profession of favoring his holiness in every- 
thing," etc. 

The parliament, therefore, and the grand council had, 
by an abuse of power, decided that each one of the 
mendicant orders should have but two votes in the faculty, 
so that thirty-four Franciscans, thirty-eight Dominicans, 
thirty- three Augustinians, and nineteen Carmelites had 
only eight votes in the faculty. 

" Forty-three Cistercians and six canons regular, who are all for 
Rome, are to be treated as the above friars." 

* Projet du Reforme, Pap. De Harlay. . 



36 



The True Origin 



That, besides being the most numerous, the oppo- 
nents of the articles were the most learned, is evident 
from the details we have given ; all the professors of 
Sorbonne, with the exception of Pirot, all the professors 
of Navarre, except one, Lefevre, taught the ultramontane 
opinions. The MSS. Colbert prove this also beyond the 
possibility of doubt. 

That the opponents of the declaration were also men 
most remarkable for their piety, is acknowledged by those 
who were engaged in giving information to Colbert. 

To show the exactness of the facts given us here, M. 
Gerin quotes the words of a famous anonymous book, 
La Tradition des Faits, that appeared in 1760, by the 
Gallican Abbe Chauvelin, clerical counsellor to the 
parliament of Paris. The abbe writes : 

" When it was resolved to oblige the ecclesiastics to profess the 
maxims of France, what difficulties stood in the way? It was neces- 
sary to extort from many of them their consent. Others opposed 
obstacles which all the authority of the parliament could only with 
difficulty remove. It became necessary to use all the zeal and light 
of several prelates, and of several doctors, who were favorable to the 
true teaching, to bring back the great number of ultramontanes in 
the French clergy. . . . The ecclesiastics 'did not cease from re- 
sistance until the parliament used its authority to restrain them. 
. . . The university and the faculty of law submitted without 
difficulty, but they were obliged to proceed by way of authority to 
make the faculty of theology obey.' 1 ' 1 

The facts given above, the testimony of witnesses 
above suspicion, of those whose interest it would have 
been to conceal what they say, the action of the parlia- 
ment, and the petty ways adopted to coerce the pro- 
fessors, v. g., withholding their pay,* all evince that the 

* P. 376, from MS, letters 10,265 fr. Bibl. Imp. 



of Gallicanism. 



37 



maxims known as Gallican were forced upon the clergy 
and people of France. But not only is this the case, 
but so fully were the king and the bishops themselves 
convinced of their falsity that they retracted them. Be- 
fore showing this, we will add a curious and precious 
document from the hands of the wily Achille de Harlay, 
procureur- general, addressed to Colbert, on the 2d of 
June, 1682. After saying that the proposed visit of the 
parliament to the faculty would have been unfortunate, 
because it would have revealed to Rome the divergence 
between the latter and the government, he goes on to 
add that " of the assembly of the clergy, the greater part 
would change to-morrow, and willingly, if they were 
allowed to do so."* 

The act of the assembly, as we have seen, drew from 
the sovereign pontiff an authoritative censure. This was 
not all; the pope refused the bulls of consecration for 
those who had taken part in it, unless they made their 
formal submission to his decision. The king, who at 
heart was a sincere Catholic, opened his eyes to the 
danger of the church. As we have said, he withheld the 
minutes of the proceedings in the first instance, although 
he allowed a private protest to be made. Later he re- 
voked his decree ordering the doctrine of the four arti- 
cles to be taught in the French schools. Page 454 has a 
letter of Louis to the sovereign pontiff, in which he in- 
forms his holiness of this, September 14th, 1693. A 
posthumous work of Daguesseauf says : 

* Bibl. Imp. MSS. Harlay, 367, vol. v., p. 145 
t Vol. xiii., p. 423. 



3» 



The True Origin 



" This letter of Louis XIV. to Pope Innocent was the seal put 
upon the accommodation between the court of Rome and the clergy 
of France ; and conformably to the engagement it contained, his 
majesty did not any longer enforce the observation of the edict of 
March, 1682, which obliged all who wished to obtain degrees to sus- 
tain the declaration pi the clergy made that year with regard to 
ecclesiastical authority ; ceasing thus to impose, on this point, the 
obligation existing, while the edict was in force, and leaving for the 
future, as before the edict, full liberty to sustain the doctrine." 

L'Abbe de Pradt, in his work, Les Quatre Concordats, 
speaks of the letter of Louis XIV., and says that Pius 
VII. had it with him — " an old scrap of paper," as Na- 
poleon expressed it — and wished the emperor to sign it. 
This, however, Napoleon declined to do, until he could 
consult his theologians. On their advice he refused to 
sign it. He did more. The abbe says : 

" When the archives of Rome were brought to Paris, Napoleon 
went one day to the Hotel de Soubise, in which they were kept. 
There he obtained the letter of Louis XIV. He took it with him, 
and, on his return to the Tuileries, threw it into the fire, saying, 
'We sha'n't be troubled hereafter with these ashes.' " 

Montholon tells us, in his Memoires pour servir d 
V Histoire de France, that Napoleon dictated to him these 
words concerning the book of the Abbe de Pradt : 

" ' This work is not a libel ; if it contains some erroneous ideas, 
it contains a great number w T hich are sound and worthy of medi- 
tation.' He afterwards dictated six notes upon different points 
containeH in the work ; he takes notice in them of all that ap- 
peared to him deserving of censure ; but he has not a single 
word to say against the story of the destruction by himself of the 
letter of Louis XIV." * 



* Montholon, Memoires, vol. i., p. 113. Paris, 1823. 



of Gallicanism. 



39 



With regard to the bishops who had taken part in 
the declaration, they had the good sense and virtue to 
submit to him whom Christ has named his vicar and the 
pastor of pastors. On the 14th of September, each one 
of them wrote to Innocent XII. in the following terms : 

" Prostrate at the feet of your holiness, we profess and declare 
that we grieve deeply from our heart, and beyond what we can 
express, on account of what has been done in the assembly, so 
greatly offensive to your holiness and your predecessors ; and, 
therefore, whatever may have been deemed {censeri potnit) decreed 
against ecclesiastical power and pontifical authority, we hold and 
declare that all should hold it as not decreed. Moreover, we hold 
as not determined on whatever may have been deemed {censeri 
potuit) determined on in prejudice of the rights of churches; for 
our intention was not to decree anything nor to do anything pre- 
judicial to the said churches." 

The following passages from MSS. and works of the 
day add confirmation to this letter. 

A memoir on the liberties of the Gallican Church, 
composed by order of " Monseigneur Louis, Dauphin de 
France, Due de Bourgoyne, mort en 1710," says: 

" This court (Rome) continues always what it has begun, and 
often obliges us to retract or alter what we have judiciously and 
necessarily done against her. Nothing proves this better than the 
history of the assembly of 1682.'" 

Adrien Baillet, writing his Deniele de PJiilippe le Bel 
avec Boniface VIII. , tells us : 

" In the first variance (between Philip and Boniface), it was the 
court of Rome that gave satisfaction to that of France ; in the 
second (of the assembly), it is the court of France that has just 
rendered satisfaction to that of Rome." 

Bayle, Dictionnaire, art. " Braunbom," writes : 

" France was so far from having broken with the pope, from the 



40 The True Origin of Gallicanism. 



year 1690 to the year 1701, that she became, on the contrary, more 
papist. It is known, moreover, that Innocent XII. gained the day, 
in having things put again on their old footing in 1693." 

We have tried to give the substance of M. Gerin's 
work. We feel that we have given but a meagre idea 
of it. Still, this much is evident, from what we have 
written, that the doctrine known as Gallican was not 
the doctrine of the French clergy. That it afterward 
became so, in great part was owing undoubtedly to the 
influence of the assembly of 1682, and of those who 
in high positions lent their aid to its propagation among 
the rising generation of students. They, early imbued 
with these maxims, were far less to blame than the 
men who first broached such principles. Let us hope 
that the comparatively few who hold to these opinions, 
seeing the origin of what they profess, will understand 
the worthlessness of them, and unite with the universal 
church in professing belief in the infallibility of the See 
of Peter. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



II. 

THE FIRST CECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF THE VATICAN. 

{The Catholic World, September, 1870.) 

THE proceedings of the Vatican Council have reached 
a stage that allows us to witness again its external 
splendor and imposing presence. Grand and most august 
as it certainly is, still every thing that strikes the eye 
fades away as one thinks of its sublime office, of its 
important, unlimited influence and effect. The nature of 
the subject it has just treated will necessarily make 
that influence overshadow all ages to come, and that 
effect cease to be felt only with the last shock of a world 
passing away. 

The question that for more than a year has agitated all 
circles of society, that for the past three months has been 
a subject of exciting debate among the fathers of the 
council, could not have been of greater weight. It is one 
of those truths essential to the existence of the church, and 
had it not been practically acknowledged among the faith- 
ful throughout the world, Christianity, unless otherwise 
sustained by its Author, would have been an impossibility. 
The vital point examined was the essence of the union of 
the church, of the union of faith, to determine dogmat- 
ically in what it consists, who or what is the person or 

41 



42 



The First (Ecumenical 



body that can so hold and teach the faith as to leave no 
doubt of any kind whatsoever regarding its absolute divine 
certainty. 

Up to the present day the infallibility of an oecumenical 
council, or of the whole church dispersed throughout the 
world, has been recognized as the ultimate rule by all 
who lay claim to orthodoxy ; but with that council, or 
with that church dispersed throughout the world, as a re- 
quisite — sine qua non — was the communion and consent of 
the sovereign pontiff. Where he was with the bishops, 
there was the faith; no matter how many bishops might 
meet together and decree, if Peter was not with them, 
there was no certainty of belief, no infallible guidance. 
Nay, their decrees were received only in so far as ap- 
proved by him. Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia, was the formula 
recognized by tradition. In a word, where Peter was, 
there was to be found infallible teaching; where Peter 
was not, there neither was the teaching infallible. 
None in the church ever thought of gainsaying this. 
But there came a time when the element all agreed 
hitherto to look on as essential began to be a subject 
of doubt and of discussion. Writers went so far as to 
say that the pope could be judged by the other body 
of teachers, the bishops ; and this followed naturally 
from a mistrust in the unfailing orthodoxy of the 
sovereign pontiff The greater phases of this move- 
ment are well known. The Council of Constance had 
hardly closed when the Council of Basle put in practice 
the principles broached by its predecessor, and deposed 
the reigning head of the church, putting in his stead 
Amadeus of Savoy with the title of Felix V. In the 
midst of this confusion, Eugenius IV. held the Council 



Council of the Vatican. 



43 



of Florence, in which the remarkable decree was pub- 
lished that declared the pope the vicar of Christ, the ruler 
of the flock, and the doctor of the universal church. 
Those of the French clergy who clung with tenacity to 
the principles of Basle, refused to receive this decree, 
under pretense of the uncecumenical character of the 
Council of Florence. The Jansenists availed them- 
selves of the advantage this pretext gave them. 
Although eighty-five French bishops wrote in the year 
1652 to Innocent X., according, they say, to the custom 
of the church, in order to obtain the condemnation of 
these heretics, the latter still held their ground, and were 
able to accuse the French assembly of 1682 of inconsis- 
tency, in attempting to force on them a decision of the 
pope, whom the assembly itself declared fallible. The 
celebrated Arnauld taught that the refusal of its approba- 
tion to a papal decision on the part of one individual 
church was enough to make the truth of such a decision 
doubtful. 

We shall try to give some idea of the importance 
of the question of papal infallibility by a parallel de- 
velopment of two opposite teachings, in a rapid sketch. 

The cardinal principle of Gallicanism is the denial of the 
inerrancy of the sovereign pontiff in his solemn ruling in 
matters of faith and morals when teaching the whole 
church. Any one who attentively looks at the question 
must see the close connection of the primacy with the 
claim to unerring certainty in teaching. The domain ol 
the church is in faith, in spirituals ; temporals being sec- 
ondary, and the subject of legislation only in so far as ne- 
cessarily bound up with the former. The only reason why 
a teacher can lay claim to obedience is because he teaches 



44 



The First (Ecumenical 



the truth, and this is especially the case where faith and 
conscience are concerned. If the sovereign pontiff have 
not this faculty of teaching the truth without danger of 
error, then he cannot demand implicit submission. The 
church dispersed throughout the world, being infallible, 
cannot be taught by one who is capable of falling into 
error. The ordinances therefore and decrees of the pontiff, 
being intimately connected with faith, and issued on ac- 
count of it, must follow the nature of the submission to his 
teaching. But as this latter, in the Gallican view, is not 
obligatory unless recognized as just by the whole church, 
so neither are the ordinances and decrees to be looked on 
as binding except under a like reservation. It follows 
from this, clearly and logically, that the supremacy of the 
pope can be called supreme only by an abuse of terms ; 
consequently, ist, the texts of canon law and of the 
fathers that teach a perfect supremacy are erroneous 
or false, and have no foundation in tradition, which 
is the truth always, everywhere, and by every one 
held in the same way; 2d, the texts of Scripture that 
refer to Peter are to be restricted to him personally, 
or, when seeming to regard his successors, are to be 
interpreted in a sense not favorable to the idea of a 
perfect supremacy. The pope thus becomes amenable 
to the church ; he is a divinely constituted centre, 
nothing more ; the official representative of the bishops of 
the whole church dispersed throughout the world, 
which alone is the ultimate criterion of truth. He can, 
therefore, be judged by the bishops, be corrected by 
them, deposed by them, and his asserted right to 
reserve powers to himself to the prejudice of ordinaries, 
or to legislate for dioceses other than his own, is to 



Council of the Vatican. 



45 



be set aside. A species of radicalism is thus intro- 
duced into the church. The bishops themselves are 
not to be looked on as infallible judges of the faith of 
their flocks even, and the faithful themselves, or the 
people, become the ultimate judges of what is to be 
held as of faith. Instead of being taught, they teach; 
instead of being a locus theologicus, they become the 
ecclesia docens; and the teachers and rulers become the 
ruled and taught. As the people themselves are liable 
to be swayed by the influence and teaching of artful 
men, we have in consequence a weak and uncertain 
rule to go by ; weak, because of the moral impossibility 
of knowing the sense of the whole church, for even the 
members of an oecumenical council might not exactly 
represent the faith of their individual churches ; un- 
certain, because of the facility with which in past time 
the people of many individual churches have been led 
astray. 

As we write, it seems as if we heard some indignant 
protest against what we have just said. We reply 
that we do not refer to individual opinions ; many 
Gallicans refused to go the length of their principles ; 
a sense of danger alarmed their piety and put them 
on their guard. For our part, we treat of the prin- 
ciples themselves, and deem perfectly consequent what 
we have asserted. It would be an easy matter to 
illustrate it with facts of the present as of the past ; 
but it would be beyond our scope just now. Any 
student of history will have no difficulty in recalling 
the manner in which defections from the church have 
been brought about, and the errors of those who once 
seemed columns of the temple. The inadequacy of the 



4 6 



The First CEcumenical 



Gallican rule is still further shown by its practical in- 
convenience. It is fortunate that in the early church it 
had no place whatsoever. Peter being then recognized 
as the head and teacher of the church, all controversies 
were referred to him, and by him they were settled. 
Petrus per os Leonts, per os AgatJwnis locutus est ; 
so spoke the fathers of Chalcedon and of the Sixth 
Council. Suppose for a moment it had been other- 
wise ; suppose, when the Pelagian heresy arose, it had 
been necessary to hear the voice of the whole church 
scattered over the earth — this being the rule — the whole 
church, not any one part, was to give the doctrine 
from which it was not lawful to depart. Zosimus was 
but one bishop; so, too, was Innocent I.; Augustine 
was only one learned man, and Prosper of Aquitaine, 
a Christian poet and polished scholar, but only one 
other father after all. Those who wrote with them 
bore witness each for his own particular church. What 
had become of the churches of Scythia, of Lybia, of 
Ethiopia, of Arabia ? Who had penetrated into the 
Indies, or set sail for the islands of the sea, or reached 
the far-off coasts of the Sinenses ? Who was to explain 
with accuracy to those distant Christians the cunning 
dealing of Celestius and Pelagius, that had deceived the 
vigilance of the eastern fathers, and lay bare the hypo- 
critical professions that had misled even Zosimus ? 
Who was to bring back the opinion or belief of these 
isolated churches without danger of misunderstanding 
or misinterpretation? Those were not days when com- 
munication was easy. Weeks and months amid all 
kinds of dangers and uncertainty were required to 
reach even those places that lay near the shores of 



Council of the Vatican, 



47 



the Mediterranean. It was physically impossible to 
ascertain with unerring sureness the belief or condem- 
nation of those far-off Christians ; and as long as their 
assent was not given, there was no adequate rule of 
faith. Consequently, there was no prompt or efficacious 
means of correcting error; the means at hand were of 
probable worth, therefore not sufficient to use against 
heresy, that could always appeal to the universal church 
dispersed throughout the world, and when condemned 
by those near, fly to the probable protection of those 
at a distance, without the least possibility of ever 
knowing the belief of those to whom they appealed. 
In the meanwhile, heresy crept into the flock, estab- 
lished itself there ; for there was none to cast it forth ; 
and the fold became tainted. Thus from age to age 
Christianity would have been a mass of error, the truth 
being obscured or suffocated by the weight of falsity 
from the want of a prompt practical means by which 
heresy could be detected and crushed at its birth. 
Happily no such state of things existed ; the chair of 
Peter was the abode of truth ; it was set up against 
error, and the quick ear and intuitive eye of Christ's 
vicar heard and saw the evil, and met it at the outset. 

The doctrine which teaches the opposite of what we 
have been describing, and which is now of faith, clears 
up all difficulties, and comes to us in all the beauty 
and consistency that adorns truth. Jesus Christ has 
made Peter and his successors the foundation of the 
church. He has given to him, and to each of those 
who succeed him, of his own firmness, and strengthened 
his faith that it fail not, that he may confirm his 
brethren. In this office of confirming his brethren, 



4 8 



Th e First CEc u m e n ica I 



Peter holds the place of Christ, and acts in his name. 
The gift he possesses, however, is not one of inspira- 
tion ; but he is assisted and kept from erring in his 
judgment of what is contained in the revelation made 
by Christ to man. To arrive at a knowledge of what 
that revelation is, he seeks in his own church, and, 
according to the need, in the churches everywhere that 
he may know their traditions. The judgment he makes 
is infallible, and in promulgating it he lays down the 
tenets of faith for the whole church. Hence he be- 
comes the immovable rock upon which the faithful are 
builded, he is the centre around which they revolve, 
the orb from which they receive the light of faith. 
Hence he has subject to him the minds of all, and the 
character of his primacy becomes more clear and fully 
evident. It is no longer a mere point of visible com- 
munion, but an active power placed by God to rule, 
with unfailing guidance in faith, and with a consequent 
spiritual intuitiveness, that makes him discern what is 
for the good of the church at large throughout the 
world. Hence all are bound to obey him in what 
regards the faith and teachings of Christ ; who is with 
him, is with Christ ; whosoever is against him, is 
against his Master. Hence, too, by a direct consequence, 
there can be no power set up against his ; all the 
bishops of the church depend on him, receive their 
jurisdiction from him, and can exercise it only at his 
word. What a sublime picture of unity, of order, and 
of strength ! As an army in array the church advances 
to do battle against the foes of Christ, never more suc- 
cessful, never more glorious, than when her children, 
recognizing their dependence, and, harkening to her 



Council of the Vatican. 



49 



voice, with one mind and with one heart follow the 
leadership of Peter. No wonder this spectacle struck 
the unbelieving mind with astonishment, or made the 
gifted writer of England burst forth into the glowing 
description so familiar to all ! 

The difference of opinion that existed among the 
bishops on the subject of the infallibility is known 
throughout the four quarters of the globe. What was 
the cause of it ? If any one imagines that all who joined 
in opposing a definition from the outset were actuated 
by the same motives, he would certainly be wide of the 
mark. While the main point of the controversy was held 
by the ultramontanes without exception, and there was 
but the one question as to the formula to be used, the 
opposition, as they were generally called, taken all to- 
gether, had no fixed principle of accord, save an agree- 
ment to disagree with the defining the doctrine as of 
faith. To analyze the constituent parts of this body we 
shall class them according to ideas. 

First in conviction, in determination, and in influence 
were the Gallicans, properly so called, who held and 
taught the very opposite of the proposed dogma. They 
were mostly men who had been bred in this teaching, 
and who deeply reverenced the memories of those who 
held and taught it in past times. This class was not 
very numerous, though it grew larger in the course of 
the council by the accession of those whose examina- 
tion of the question convinced them of the claim 
of Gallicanism to their adherence. 

The second class comprised those who, believing the 
doctrine themselves, or at least, favoring it speculatively, 
did not think it capable of definition, not deeming the 
tradition of the church clear enough on this point. 



50 



The First (Ecumenical 



A third class, the most numerous, regarded the defi- 
nition as possible, but practically fraught with peril to 
the church, as impeding conversions, as exasperating to 
governments. For the sake of peace, and for the good 
of souls, they would not see it proclaimed as of faith. 

All of these dissident prelates, we are bound to say, 
acted with conscientious conviction of the justice of the 
cause they defended. They were bound in conscience to 
declare their opinions, and to make them prevail by all 
lawful influence. If on one side or the other of this most 
important and vital question any went beyond the limits 
of moderation, or used means not dictated by prudence 
or charity, it is nothing more than might have been ex- 
pected in so large a number of persons, of such varied 
character and education. Instead of being shocked at 
the little occurrences of this nature, we should rather be 
struck with admiration at the self restraint and affability 
which were shown, despite the intensity of feeling and 
strength of conviction. In a word, that the Council of 
the Vatican did not break up months ago in disorder and 
irreconcilable enmity, is because it was God's work, and 
not man's ; it was because charity ruled in it, in spite of 
defects, and not the passions that govern the political de - 
bates of men. The earnest desire all had of a mutual 
good understanding was evinced on occasion of the speech 
of a well-known cardinal, which, though not approved of 
by all, gave evidence of a sincere desire for conciliation 
and agreement. The effect was remarkable ; a thrill of 
pleasure went through the assembly, for the moment each 
one seemed to breathe freely, and to hail his words as 
harbingers of peace in the midst of excitement and 
anxiety. 



Council of the Vatican, 



5i 



It was shortly after this incident that the closure of the 
general discussion on the four chapters of the present 
constitution took place. The regulations provide for this 
contingency, making it lawful for ten prelates to petition 
for the closing of a discussion, the proposal being then 
put to the vote of all the fathers, and the majority decid- 
ing. In this case, a desire not to interfere with remarks 
which bishops, for conscientious reasons, proposed to 
make, kept this regulation in abeyance, and it was only 
after fifty-five speeches had been listened to, that one 
hundred and fifty bishops sent in a petition for closing, 
believing there would be ample time and opportunity for 
everyone to speak and present amendments when the 
schema would be examined in detail. An overwhelming 
majority voted the closure. It seems difficult to under- 
stand how this could be found fault with. Had there 
been no further chance to speak, there would have been 
reason undoubtedly to claim hearing, or complain of not 
having been heard. But, as has been seen since, there 
have been discussions on each part of the schema; and on 
the last chapter, regarding the doctrine of infallibility, one 
hundred and nine names were inscribed for speaking, of 
which number sixty-five spoke, the remainder by mutual 
consent abstaining from speaking ; thus of their own 
accord putting a stop to a discussion in which it was 
morally impossible to say anything new. It seems surely 
to be a strange assertion to say there has been any real 
infringement of the liberty of speech in the council, when 
there appears to have been so much of it that the members 
themselves grew weary of it. 

While we are on this subject, we wish to speak a lit- 
tle more fully, as the freedom of the council has been 



52 



The First (Ecumenical 



publicly impugned in two works, published in Paris, 
against which the presidents and the fathers have thought 
proper formally to protest. 

The grounds of the accusation are chiefly three : 

ist. The appointment of the congregation, the members 
of which were named by the sovereign pontiff, and re- 
ceived or rejected the postulata, or propositions to be 
presented to the council for discussion. 

2d. The dogmatic deputation having been composed of 
those in favor of the definition, and the members having 
been put on it by management ; moreover, this deputation 
exercised a controlling influence in the council. 

3d. The interruption of those who were giving expres- 
sions to their opinions; in the exercise of their right to 
speak. 

We preface our brief reply to these objections by two 
quotations. One is from the letter of an apostate priest, 
A. Pichler, at present director of the imperial library at 
St. Petersburg, which was written by him in Rome last 
winter,and was published in the Presse of Vienna. In it 
he says, " It seems to us no council has ever been freer 
or more independent." The second quotation is from 
one of the two works referred to above — Ce qui se passe 
an Concile. At page 131 we read : 

" In truth, if the pope alone is infallible, it is not only his right, 
but a duty, and a strict duty, to guide the bishops, united in council, 
or dispersed throughout the world, to encourage them if they be in 
the right way, to reprove them if they go out of it, to take an active 
part in the work of the assembly, to inspire its deliberations, and 
dictate its decrees." 

Apart from the spirit that animates the writer of the 
above, there is much in what he says, and we take him at 



Council of the Vatican. 



53 



his word. The (Ecumenical Council of the Vatican has 
pronounced its irrevocable and infallible decree, declaring 
infallibility to be and to have been a prerogative of the 
sovereign pontiff, and that his decisions ex cathedra are irre- 
formable of themselves, and not by virtue of the consent of 
the episcopacy. We therefore draw our deduction and jus- 
tify the sovereign pontiff by these very words, in nomina- 
ting the members of the congregation, and in conferring on 
it the ample powers it has. Secondly, we give him the 
praise of moderation, because he did not make a full use of 
the rights accorded him by the author of the citation we 
have given. Were we to follow this writer, we should have 
to accuse the pope of having in part neglected a grave duty 
toward the council, for he did not dictate its decrees. In 
the very beginning, he told the bishops he gave them the 
schemata, unapproved by him, to be studied, altered, or 
amended as they saw fit ; and, in fact, when the decrees 
prepared previously by theologians were proposed by the 
congregation, they were recast and amended time and 
again, and were finally decided by a vote of the fathers, 
and approved by the pontiff without alteration. This is 
surely not dictation ; dictation does not admit of reply or 
refusal, it takes away all liberty whatsoever. The sover- 
eign pontiff then did not dictate the decrees. 

Let us return to our triple objection. First, with 
regard to the congregation. In the early numbers of 
The Catholic World for the current year, an account 
of the composition of this body is given, as well as the 
reasons for its appointment. We refer our readers to the 
March number, in which it may be seen that, although 
possessed of sovereign powers over the church, defined as 
belonging to him, by the Council of Florence among 



54 



The First (Ecumenical 



others, there was no disposition to exercise coercion on 
the part of the pope, who, in controlling the action of the 
council in this way, was only making use of a right the 
whole church acknowledged. Moreover, the composition 
of this body was itself a guarantee of justice and zeal for 
the general welfare. That there were not named for it 
those who were known to be hostile to what has just been 
declared of faith, was nothing more than natural. More- 
over, when these high ecclesiastics had admitted postulata, 
their work was over; the propositions passed into the con- 
trol of the fathers, and were decided by vote. 

The answer to the second objection is easier even. 
This deputation was elected by the fathers themselves ; 
and as the large majority favored the teachings of Rome, 
they elected none who was opposed to them. As for the 
accusation of management, we must say that persons who 
understood well the tendencies of the prominent men of 
all parties, naturally, as happens in all such large bodies, 
directed the choice of candidates, and the final vote of the 
fathers settled the matter. It is hard to see how the 
rights of any were violated. This deputation, from the 
merit of those that composed it, could not be without 
great weight in the council ; and when we consider that it 
was the choice of the large majority, and was in harmony 
with the views of the majority, it is not wonderful that it 
controlled to a great extent the votes of those composing 
the council. 

The third objection is one that must be treated with 
great delicacy, for two reasons — because of the impossi- 
bility of knowing all the circumstances, and because those 
who are accused are in a position that prevents them 
from justifying themselves. The presidents were named 



Council of the Vatican. 



55 



to act for the sovereign pontiff, to preserve due order, to 
see that the discussion was limited to the matter in hand, 
and to prevent anything that might tend to disturb good 
order, or diminish respect for the authority and person of 
him they represented. If, in the discharge of their duty, 
they displeased those they addressed, this was to have 
been expected ; if also they in any way did not observe 
the due mean, so hard to reach in everything human, one 
should excuse, if needful, the defect, when especially the 
great merits, the distinguished services, the known virtue 
and high position of these cardinals are taken into con- 
sideration. 

And while we are on this subject of objections made 
against the council we may notice two others that es- 
pecially regard the decree of the infallibility : they are, 
1st. This decision destroys the constitution of the church, 
doing away with the apostolic college of bishops, and 
changing the order established by Christ. 2d. This de- 
cree is a theological conclusion ; but theological con- 
clusions are not of faith, and cannot be so declared. 

These objections are formidable only in appearance. 
No one contends that each bishop when consecrated 
succeeds to all the privileges and powers of one of the 
apostles. The bishops, then, not having them in the 
beginning when consecrated by the apostles, were dis- 
tinct from the apostles, the apostolic college remaining. 
When one apostle died, his death did not affect the 
powers of the church, which remained the same, the 
other apostles sufficing ; so when two, three, or more 
died, still one remained. He had the same full powers 
given to each, with subordination to Peter as head of 
the church. Thus with one apostle and the episcopate 



56 



The First (Ecumenical 



the essence of ecclesiastical rule is preserved. When 
St. Peter died, he left a successor, being the only one 
of the twelve who did ; for he was the only one who 
had a see. His successor received all his rights, the 
power of binding and loosing, of teaching and legislat- 
ing. He was thus the one apostle living still in the 
world, and each successive pontiff has the same char- 
acter — the sollicittido omnium ecclesiarum is his — as it 
was Paul's, John's, and Peter's. The essence of the 
hierarchy is in this way preserved ; the apostolic and 
episcopal elements are there, and the phraseology of 
Christianity keeps ever before us this idea ; for the see 
of Peter is always known as the Sedes Apostolica. St. 
Peter Chrysologus speaks of St. Peter living and rul- 
ing in his successor — Beatus Petrus qui in successore suo 
et vivit et prcesidet et prcestat inquirentibus earn fidei 
veritatem. So far, then, from this definition destroying 
the character of the hierarchy, it asserts and vindicates 
it by declaring that the one apostle in the church has 
never lost his apostolic privilege of inerrancy, and that 
he is truly possessed of the full powers without diminu- 
tion that belonged to the prince of the apostles. 

To the second objection, regarding the nature of the 
definition, as being a theological conclusion, we reply, 
firstly, that what the scripture, according to the re- 
ceived and now authentic interpretation of the church, 
taught, and what the practical acknowledgment of the 
faithful in all ages implied, cannot be called a theo- 
logical conclusion ; but must be regarded as being 
what it is — a directly revealed truth; secondly, a the- 
ological conclusion, though not of faith in itself, as 
being the deduction of reason, by the superadded 



Council of the Vaticaii. 57 



authoritative decision of the church can become of faith, as 
often as the denial of such conclusion affects the truth 
of that dogma from which it has been deduced.* Such 
questions are fairly within the range of the church's 
arbitration ; and when there is a doubt concerning the 
character of a conclusion, it is her province to decide 
whether it be or be not hurtful or beneficial to the 
truth of which she alone is the divinely constituted 
guardian. Examples in the past history of the coun- 
cils of the church are not wanting ; for our purpose, 
take the Sixth Council. The question of the two wills 
was a theological conclusion ; no one ever spoke of the 
two wills before that epoch ; the phrase does not occur 
in all previous theology or ecclesiastical history. We 
first hear of it in the east, where metaphysical studies 
flourished, and where intellectual pride had already 
brought about the Arian, Nestorian, and Eutychian 
heresies. 

We have mentioned the fact of the closure of the dis- 
cussion on the fourth chapter, by mutual consent of those 
whose names were inscribed to speak. This was imme- 
diately followed by voting. The first three chapters were 
soon gotten over ; the fourth is the one that contains 
the doctrine on the infallibility, and it met with more op- 
position. 

On Saturday, July nth, was held the general congre- 
gation in which the details of this portion of the schema 

* Since writing the above, on reading Franzelin, De Deo Uno, we find, 
page 25, an even stronger assertion than the above, regarding theological 
conclusions ; he adduces the very example we have given of the two wills. 
"The proposition evident by reason is assumed to demonstrate that the 
conclusion is contained in the premiss evident by faith. v Page 26. 



58 



The First (Ecumenical 



were up for approval or rejection. On this occasion the 
voting was by rising simply, and against the definition 
there were forty-seven votes. 

On the 13th, another general congregation was called 
to vote, according to the regulations, on the whole 
schema, by name, with placet, or placet juxta modum, 
or non placet. The register, it appears, stands as follows: 
45 1 placets, 62 placets juxta modum, and 88 non placets. 

Some of these placets juxta modum recommended the 
insertion of words that would make the decree clearer 
and stronger. The schema was accordingly altered, and 
the amendments were retained in the general congrega- 
tion held Saturday, July 16th. 

On Sunday morning was distributed a monitum, by 
which the fathers were notified that the fourth public 
session would be held on Monday, July 18th, at nine 
o'clock. 

The 1 8th July will henceforth be a memorable day in 
the history of the church. It did not dawn, however, 
with the brilliancy usual at this season, or almost habitual 
with the grand fetes of Pius IX. It rained much during 
the preceding night, and up to the time of the meeting 
of the session wayfarers were liable any time to be 
caught by fitful showers. The thought that, although a 
great and most beneficial act was to be done, still there 
were not a few of the fathers who thought otherwise than 
the majority in a matter about to be made binding on the 
conscience of all, was not calculated to heighten the ex- 
ternal manifestation of cheerfulness, whatever feeling of 
thankfulness to Providence for the event was in the heart. 
As the interest was intense, there were not many who 
deemed they could come, who were not present. At nine 



Council of the Vatican. 59 



o'clock precisely, his eminence Cardinal Barili began a low 
mass, without chant. At the end of it, the small throne 
for the gospels was placed on the altar, and upon it the 
copy of the sacred Scriptures. In a few moments the 
sovereign pontiff entered, preceded by the senate and by 
the officers of his court, and, after kneeling a few mo- 
ments at the prie-dieu, went to his throne in the apsis 
of the aula. The customary prayers were recited by him ; 
the litany of the saints was chanted, and the " Veni Cre- 
ator Spiritus " intoned, the people present taking part ; 
after which the Bishop of Fabriano ascended the pulpit 
and read the schema to be voted on, and finished with ask- 
ing the fathers whether it pleased them. Monsignor Ja- 
cobini next, from the pulpit, called the name of each prel- 
ate assisting at the council. Five hundred and thirty-five 
answered placet, two replied non placet, and one hundred 
and six were absent, some because sick, the far greater 
number not wishing to vote favorably. As soon as the 
result was made known officially to Pius IX., who 
awaited it in silence, but with calmness, he arose and 
in a clear, distinct and firm voice announced the fact 
of all, with the exception of two, having given a favor- 
able vote; " wherefore," he continued, "by virtue of 
our apostolic authority, with the approval of the sacred 
council, we define, confirm, and approve the decrees 
and canons just read." Immediately there arose mur- 
murs of approbation inside and outside the hall, the 
doors of which were surrounded by a large crowd, 
and, increasing from the impossibility those present 
experienced of repressing their feeling, it swelled into 
a burst of congratulation, and a Viva Pio Nono Papa 
infallibile. We shall not say anything regarding the 



60 The First Oecumenical Council. 

propriety of such proceedings in a church ; but there are 
times when feeling is so powerful as to break through 
all ideas of conventionality. As soon as all were quiet, 
with unfaltering voice and excellent intonation the pope 
began the Te Deum. It was taken up alternately by the 
Sistine choir and those present. By an accident, at the 
Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, the people got out, and took 
up the part of the Sistine choir, and kept it to the end, 
alternately with the bishops, and with a volume of sound 
that completely drowned the delicate notes of the papal 
singers, and which, if not as musical as their chant, was 
far more impressive. The session ended with the apos- 
tolic benediction from the holy father, accompanied by 
an indulgence for all assisting, in accordance with the 
custom of the church. Thus passed one of the most 
momentous and remarkable occasions the world has ever 
witnessed, a day henceforth memorable in the annals of 
the church and of mankind, the results of which the 
human mind is scarce capable of grasping. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



ill. 

' LETTER FROM ROME. 

( The Catholic World, November, 1870.) 

Rome, Oct 15th, 1870. 

IN times of great excitement, people are apt to give 
their fancies or apprehensions for facts, and it be- 
comes extremely difficult to arrive at the exact truth. 
This has been evidenced in the occurrences that have 
lately taken place in the Papal States. It is simply 
with a view of giving a correct account of these events 
that now, three weeks after the Italian occupation of 
Rome, we take up our pen for the purpose of writing 
only what we know ourselves or have had from credit- 
able eye-witnesses, or have gleaned from the confes- 
sions of the conquerors themselves. 

The mission of Count Ponza di San Martino, the letter 
of Victor Emmanuel, the reply of the sovereign pontiff, 
and the subsequent invasion of the pontifical territory 
by Generals Cadorna, Angioletti, and Bixio, we pass over 
as too well known and authenticated. The order had 
been given to the troops to fall back on Rome, and 
wherever feasible it was carried out. Col. La Charette, in 
command at Viterbo, succeeded, by strenuous efforts and 

61 



62 Letter from Rome, October, 1870. 



forced marches across the country, in reaching Civita 
Vecchia, and Colonel Azzanesi, whose character for fidel- 
ity malignant persons had tried to asperse, brought all 
his men from Velletri safely to Rome. Communication 
with Civita Vecchia was kept up until the 15th of Sep- 
tember, when the railway was cut, and that place, 
threatened by a large army under General Bixio, and by 
a strong fleet of seven ironclads, capitulated, unfortu- 
nately, without firing a gun. 

On the evening of the 14th of September, the advanced 
guards of General Cadorna came near enough to Rome 
to have a skirmish with some of the Zouaves and dra- 
goons out on the Flaminian Way, One of the officers 
of the Italian lancers, the Conte Crotti, was taken pris- 
oner ; while on the side of the Papal troops, one, Sergeant 
Shea, was seriously wounded, and several were captured. 
During this and the next three days, troops poured into 
the Campagna, and took up positions around the city, 
some crossing the Tiber by a pontoon-bridge and trans- 
ferring large siege- guns that were to be used for making 
the breach. These guns were of large calibre, and did 
their work effectually. In the meanwhile, the Papal 
troops completed their barricades at the gates and the 
bastions in front of them, and on the 17th, 18th and 19th of 
September there were occasional skirmishing and cannon- 
ading. The points fortified were the Porta Pancrazio, the 
Porta San Lorenzo, Porta San Giovanni, the entrance of 
the railway, the Porta Pia, the Porta Salara, and the 
Porto del Popolo. After a great deal of unproductive 
parley, the besiegers, finding they could gain nothing by 
it, gave notice on the 19th that they would attack the 
next day at five o'clock. The intimation had no effect on 



Letter from Rome, October, 1870. 63 



the Papal commanders, the pope having already, in a 
letter bearing date of this day, thanked the army for their 
devotion, and signified the course he wished pursued. 

The Papal army, the whole army, both native troops 
and foreign, did not belie the good opinion of their sov- 
ereign. The devotion and courage of all, especially of 
the natives, subject to a pressure to which the foreign 
element were strangers, and which it required all the force 
of religious principle to resist, have seldom been sur- 
passed. In the fighting that followed-, the artillery, prin- 
cipally native, suffered most in proportion ; while the 
faithful discharge of their duty by the native gens d'armes 
and their auxiliaries, natives of the provinces formerly 
enlisted under the name of squadriglieri to suppress brig- 
andage, was such as to gain them the distinction of the 
hatred and violence of the mob. We make one remark 
here : it is that, when one sees such fidelity in the troops, 
it is a sign that the real feeling of the majority and of 
good is with the authority the troops support. Let us go 
on with our narrative. 

With praiseworthy punctuality, on the morning of the 
20th of September, the first gun of the attack was fired 
against the city, and in a few moments the cannonading 
became general. The points assailed were the Pincio and 
Porta Pinciana, the Porta Salara, the wall between this 
and Porta Pia also fiercely battered, Porta San Giovanni, 
and the three arches of the railway entrance. The bom- 
bardment from outside the Porta San Pancrazio, fortu- 
nately, did not begin until shortly after eight o'clock, it is 
said through failure of General Bixio to come up to time. 
The attack was very determined and uninterrupted along 
the whole line, and was replied to with a vigor and spirit 



64 Letter from Rome, October, 1870. 



that did honor to the little park of guns of the pontifical 
army, and which their enemies appreciated and ap- 
plauded. For five hours and a half the roar and din of 
cannon and musketry was kept up, the shots averaging 
at times thirty a minute. Shortly after eight o'clock 
the firing began at the Janiculum. Here General Bixio, 
famous for his raging declarations against Rome and the 
cardinals — whom he would throw into the Tiber — com- 
manded a division, and apparently angry with the Romans 
because they would not rise against the pope, began 
throwing shells without number into the city. The shells 
passed clear over the fortifications and came down into 
the parts of Rome that lie on the left bank of the Tiber. 
There is no help for it — either General Bixio's artillery 
was the most unskillful in the world, or he absolutely 
intended to shell the city. The Porto Pancrazio, as every 
one knows, is more than a quarter of a mile from the 
river; and yet not only the houses on the same side of the 
Tiber with it were struck, but the Piazza Farnese, the 
vicinity of San Andrea della Valle, the Ghetto, and even 
the Piazza of the Pantheon suffered. One shell narrowly 
escaped striking the entablature of the famous temple of 
Agrippa, and carried destruction to a house standing on 
the side of the square next the Corso. Altogether, the 
projectiles that fell in the town were numerous ; we know 
positively ourselves of some eighty or ninety spots struck 
by shells, and we counted on the facade of St. John 
Lateran and the adjoining palace the traces of fifty. 
While all this was doing, the real work of the day was 
going on at the wall between the Porta Pia and the 
Porta Salara. The heavy siege-guns told against the 
old wall of Aurelian, certainly never built to resist the 



Letter from Rome, October, 1870. 65 



cannon of the nineteenth century. The masonry trembled 
under the terrific strokes, and at last gave way ; by ten 
o'clock a large, wide breach laid the city of the popes open 
to the army of the house of Savoy. Six battalions of 
bersaglieri with other troops had been drawn up in a 
copse near by awaiting the order to advance. It was 
given ; they moved up near the wall, for a short time 
crouched in the field, and then with a loud cry, "Savoia," 
rushed forward to their easy victory. They had not time 
to do much; already General Zappi, in accordance with 
the wishes of Pius IX., who had hoisted the white flag 
on the cupola of St. Peters, had arrived at the Porta Pia, 
and given orders that it should be hoisted there too. 
The firing ceased, and those whose duty it was to treat 
with General Cadorna repaired to the Villa Albani, out- 
side the Porta Salara, where he had his headquarters. At 
this time occurred a flagrant violation of the rules of war- 
fare. Both sides should have remained resting on their 
arms, without advancing. The Italians, instead, availed 
themselves of this cessation of hostilities to scale the last 
barricade. They were ordered back, and refused ; and 
thereupon the foremost Zouaves fired, killing a major and 
wounding others, though they themselves were immedi- 
ately shot down. Xow began the scenes of disorder and 
violence that were to know no cessation for three days. 
With the troops poured into the city upwards of four 
thousand " emigrati," or political exiles, and many women. 
To these men, and especially to the women who ac- 
companied them, nothing was so delightful as to insult 
and ill-treat the foreign troops in the service of the Holy 
Father. They surrounded those who were isolated, tore 
off their medals, their accoutrements, spat in their faces, 



66 Letter from Rome, October, 1870. 



and, in many instances, beat them so unmercifully that 
they fell lifeless, to all appearance. We know positively 
of four treated in this manner; and so numerous are the 
recitals of similar outrages with fatal consequences that we 
should not be at all surprised if not a few were butchered 
or thrown into the Tiber.* For this, however, we do not 
answer, as we are giving only details of which we are cer- 
tain. In the meantime, the capitulation was negotiating, 
and, when signed and approved, was executed at once, 
though the city was already, to a great extent, in the 
hands of the invading forces and their horde of returned 
outlaws. These latter got well down into the city in 
time to take part in and direct the demonstration in favor 
of the former. The cheering began in the Piazza della 
Pitota, when some officials, sent to present the act of 
capitulation, reached the office of the commander-in-chief, 
and on the Quirinal, as the troops advanced. Up to this 
time good order had been kept by the gens d'armes and 
sqiiadriglieri. Now the people in detached bodies began 
to set on soldiers separated from their corps, and to 
attack the posts held by the police. In several instances 
they met with stout resistance, and the capitol held 
out against them until the royal troops came up and made 
known to the Papal troops the news of the surrender. 
It is well for the foreign soldiers and the police, with their 
auxiliaries, that they kept together with their arms, or 
were, if unarmed, escorted by the regular soldiers of the 
Italian army ; otherwise the loss of life would have been 
fearful. Gradually the prisoners of war were gathered 
into the Citta Leonina, and there remained until the 



* Xo life was lost in this way. 



Letter from Rome, October, 1870. 67 



morning of the 22d, when they marched out with the 
honors of war. Here good order prevailed. In the re- 
mainder of the city, the masses, relieved of the presence 
of the police, and not interfered with by the conquerors, 
who were anxious to propitiate the people and have the 
demonstration in their favor unalloyed by any act of 
rigor on their part, gave themselves up to all kinds of 
excesses. Every one who has been in Italy knows what 
a vendetta means, and we will not dwell on those said 
to have occurred, but which are to be classed as private 
assassinations, and therefore have only an occasional rela- 
tion to the political events of which we are speaking. 
The acts of violence were principally directed against the 
Papal troops, who were generally protected by the Italian 
soldiers individually when their prestige was sufficient to 
sustain their voluntary interference. This, however, was 
not always the case, as Zouaves were taken from the 
hands of their protectors and brutally beaten. The reli- 
gious institutions next excited the wrath of the populace, 
who had now among them criminals who had escaped 
from prison when the doors were thrown open to free 
the political prisoners. In some instances perquisitions 
were made by soldiers, led on by officers, or by civilians 
representing themselves as authorized to search for con- 
cealed Papal Zouaves. In this way, or for the purpose of 
violence and rapine, were visited Trinita di Monte, Villa 
Lanti, the novitiate of the Sacred Heart, a monastery in 
Trasterere, the Irish College, the Roman Seminary, and 
the Gesu. 

The first of these houses is an academy of religious 
ladies of the Sacred Heart for young girls. The circum- 
stances were very aggravating. The persons conducting 



68 Letter from Rome, October, 1870. 



the search were unauthorized civilians, who had with 
them a squad of soldiers. They came at night, hunted 
everywhere, to the terror of the good ladies and their 
young charges, not shrinking from violating the sanctity 
of their apartments. The fact that nearly all the sisters 
in this house are ladies of position — not a few ladies of 
rank — while the pupils belong to the best families, will 
enable men of gentlemanly feeling to appreciate to some 
extent the gravity of the insult. 

At the Gesu, a major of the bersaglicri insolently en- 
tered the house, made all the fathers leave their rooms 
and assemble in the corridors, and listen to his incoherent 
and insulting remarks. 

At the Roman Seminary, at one o'clock A.M., under 
pretense that Papal soldiers were concealed in the house, 
a captain, with a force of some dozen men, presented 
themselves at the door, knocking furiously for admittance. 
One of the superiors came down and opened to them, 
when he was forthwith seized, and, having a pistol placed 
at each ear, was told to give up the concealed men. He 
was self-possessed enough to act with the proper pru- 
dence. The captain asked for lights, and the men dis- 
persed through the seminary, following out the orders 
given. When they retired, some silver spoons and forks 
and a watch were missing, while a quantity of the fish tor 
which Newfoundland waters are famed, owing to its tell- 
tale odor, was left upon the stairway. 

This state of things began to be so intolerable that the 
new authorities determined that a stop must be put to it. 
But they were in a difficulty ; they had come to preserve 
the order that the Papal government, they said, could not 
maintain. Here, at the outset, they found themselves 



Letter from Rome, October, 1870. 69 



with a city full of rioters — their auxiliaries in tearing 
down and trampling on the armorial bearings of the 
pontiff, the symbol of his authority, and in rendering 
helpless the former police force. How should they know 
the bad characters abroad iq, the town, and the authors 
of the misdeeds against which they were receiving hourly 
complaints ? There was nothing else to do but turn to 
the former police employes. They were sought out in 
their hiding-places, and promised protection. It was a 
wise and timely thought, as well as a compliment to the 
Papal government, and a de facto apology for the cal- 
umnies heaped on it. By the aid of the knowledge of the 
Papal police, the chevaliers dHndustrie, as well as their 
bolder confreres, were safely lodged in proper quarters, 
within forty-eight hours, to the number of four hundred. 
It is said that subsequently the number swelled to fifteen 
hundred. 

At the same time, telegrams were sent to Florence, 
and the detachments of the gnardie di pubblica sicurezza 
began to pour into the town. Peaceful citizens began to 
breathe freely and to leave their houses. To do the 
troops justice, they have as a rule behaved well. 

We have allowed this topic to carry us away from 
other points that deserve mention. We have said a de- 
monstration was made on the entry of the Italian troops 
into Rome. The first impression of any stranger who 
saw it was that there was universal rejoicing at the occu- 
pation of the city. Success with many in this world is 
everything, and material interests have so powerful an 
influence that only men of principle and strong character 
stand up for a lost cause. Nevertheless, the fear of per- 
sonal violence and the threats of the mob had an effect on 



70 Letter from Rome, October, 1870. 



many who otherwise would not have given the least sign 
of approval. We are personally acquainted with several 
persons of this description ; and things went to such a 
stage, and so great was the alarm, that those most de- 
voted to the sovereign pontiff advised the use both of 
banners and illumination to escape from violence or 
broken windows. We could mention some particulars 
on the subject that are most convincing from the charac- 
ter of the persons concerned, but we omit doing so 
through motives of delicacy. So universal became the 
use of the tricolor cockade that, in a manner, it lost its 
significance. 

As to the large vote given for annexation to the king- 
dom of Italy — any one who saw the numbers of strangers 
that poured into the city could understand how easy it 
would be to poll a large vote. We in the United States 
know how these things have been managed in past times. 
A friend of ours traveling from Foligno came to Rome 
in a train full of Garibaldians provided with free passes; 
only two days before the plebiscite. It is undoubtedly 
true that the city was full of strangers, principally men. 
Another feature of the plebiscite is this — money was dis- 
tributed with a liberal hand. A fact known to us is worth 
telling. The day before the vote, a man presented him- 
self to an inhabitant of the Citta Leonina, and at once 
asked, " How many men are there in this house ? " " Six," 
said the Roman. " Weil," said his interrogator, "here 
are six tickets, each for one pound of meat, and six for two 
pounds of bread each— and here are six SI." The tickets 
were all taken, though those for the bread and meat were 
the only ones used. A writer in the Unita Cattolica says 
he saw a large band of persons marching to the capitol 



Letter from Rome, October, 1870. 71 



with a banner at their head marked " Citta Leonina" 
He bethought him of taking a stroll in the Citta Leonina, 
and to his astonishment found it as populous as ever. 
The voting in great part was done by corporations — the 
tailors, shoemakers, smiths, carpenters, etc., forming sep- 
arate bodies. Thus each man was known, and as the vote 
had to be given publicly it required courage to say no. We 
saw ourselves one of these processions passing in the street, 
and it certainly seemed a little ridiculous ; one would have 
thought it a funeral procession were it not for the flag ahead, 
and an occasional evviva — uttered by one of the choregi, 
and taken up by the others in a way to give the impres- 
sion of anything but spontaneous action. In conclusion 
we may say of this plebiscite that it was a farce. Here 
is a city taken after five and a half hours' bombardment, 
and the people are asked to vote according to the wish 
of the victor, to choose possibly between the anarchy of 
the red republic or the government of King Victor Em- 
manuel. Modern politics are full of farces, but none was 
ever more completely such than this Roman plebiscite 
of 1870. 

The absorbing feature in the revolution that has just 
taken place is the condition of the sovereign pontiff. 
Whatever may be said to the contrary, the pope is a pris- 
oner. On the evening of the 22d of September, " Morte 
al Papa ! " was shouted in the Piazza di V. Pietro ; this 
was immediately followed by an attack on the entrances 
to the palace of the Vatican, which was repulsed by the 
fire of the Papal gens d'armes with a loss of two killed and 
several wounded on the part of the people. The result 
was the entrance of the Italian troops into the Citta Leon- 
nia, and the placing of a guard at the gate of the Vatican, 



72 Letter from Rome, October, 1870. 



The letter which Pius IX. has addressed to the cardinals 
sufficiently shows the state of things to make it superfluous 
for us to dwell on the vexations and espionage to 
which he must henceforth be subjected. This is the 
liberty guaranteed to him who is divinely appointed 
to rule all men irrespective of nationality, to receive 
reports from those who go forth to act in his name 
and with his authority, to receive appeals in case of 
erroneous judgments, and to give decrees in matters 
of more weight than life or death ! Is it possible that 
the Catholic world is going to allow this ? Is it pos- 
sible that we who have set apart a portion of our 
own territory, and devoted it to governmental purposes 
at the expense of its elective franchise, for the benefit 
of the whole country, are going to grudge the Church 
Catholic the reservation of a trifling portion of the 
earth, in all essential points hitherto much better gov- 
erned than the United States ? Are we to permit the 
interest of all the nations of the earth to be subjected 
to the caprice of any single nation ? 

We should assuredly feel as a personal insult, and as 
such resent it, if any one were to undertake to revile 
with indecent caricatures the chief- magistrate of our 
country. We all know how to distinguish between 
raillery and insult, between what is done to amuse and 
what is done for quite another purpose. We bear the 
one ; the other w r e stigmatize as it merits, and put down 
by legitimate means. The person of the sovereign 
pontiff is sacred in the discharge of his duty ; he speaks 
with the authority of Christ ; and because he does so 
the streets of Rome at this moment teem with repre- 
sentations and designs, the nature of which will not 



Letter from Rome, October, 1870. 73 



bear description, and in which the august person of 
the Vicar of our Lord is made the jest and sport of 
the profane and blasphemous ! 

The faith, too, of the Roman people is assailed. 
Infidel works of all kinds are scattered among the 
people, and political doctrines are taught by means of 
parodies on the catechism, in which the sacred formulas 
of the sublimest truths are degraded as being the 
vehicle of ideas false and foolish, not to say blas- 
phemous. We believe that the Romans will not lose 
their faith as a people. They have been subjected to 
severe tests before this, without such a result. But 
there is great danger for individuals, and that the 
education of a religious and highly cultivated people 
will be vitiated. On this ground, also, there is a claim 
on the interference of every Catholic in behalf of the 
Church of Rome, so justly termed mater et caput 
omnium ecclesiarum — the mother and head of all 
churches. 

But what interference are we Catholics of America capa- 
ble of? The condition of our country, the neutrality as 
regards all religious bodies obligatory on the government 
by the terms of the constitution, besides other weighty 
reasons, render active interference impossible. This is 
true. But there is another kind of interference that will 
be of avail at the proper time — the intervention of prayer. 
We must pray for the sovereign pontiff more than we 
have hitherto done. Our common father is surrounded by 
trials ; we must ask God to give him light and strength to 
do what in the designs of Providence will tend to the good 
of religion. We can come to the aid of the pontiff also 
by our contributions, now more needed than ever. The 



74 Letter from Rome, October, 1870. 

subscriptions to the Peter's Pence should be larger than 
heretofore, and show the usurping government that our 
head is not a pensioner on their bounty. Finally, we 
can interfere by our sympathy, that will show the 
reprobation in which we hold the act of those who 
have despoiled the church of her legitimate possessions, 
and reduced to bondage him whom Pepin and Charle- 
magne and the voice of Christendom had constituted 
free of all earthly control, that he might without trammel 
attend to the interests of Jesus Christ on earth. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS 



IV. 



LETTER FROM ROME. 



{The Catholic World, April, 1871.) 



Rome, Jan. 21, 1 871. 



OUR months have gone by since the Italian troops 



1 entered Rome through the breach made by the 
cannon of Cadorna, four months since a new light 
dawned upon the Eternal City, and its regenerators set 
about the accomplishment of their aspirations. What 
has been the development of this third life of Rome 
— la terza vita, as Terenzio Mamiani has been pleased 
to style it — in this its primal stage ? The child is 
father to the man — the seed produces the tree and its 
fruit. So, too, do the beginnings of a political state 
give an index of its future, fix the causes that are to 
produce the results of the future. The history of these 
four months, then, must be looked on with interest, 
and pondered with care. 

The present century is universally considered an age of 
progress, and it was in the name of progress that the forces 
of Victor Emmanuel entered the capital of Christianity. 
Progress implies motion from one state or condition to 
another more perfect : the simplicity of this statement can- 
not be gainsaid, and we shall assume it as uncontested. 




75 



J 6 Letter from Rome, January, 1871. 



The party of 4 progress took possession of Rome in the 
interest of progress. Has Rome progressed during these 
months since the 20th of September ? Has she gone 
from her past state to one more perfect ? Facts must 
speak ; and facts we give. One thing at a time. 

Abundance and cheapness of food are the first essentials 
in the well-being of a state, and necessarily connected with 
this is the facility of obtaining it. We cannot say that 
food is scarce in Rome ; but the absolute and relative 
cheapness have undergone a decided change, to the dis- 
advantage of the poorer as well as the wealthier classes, 
since the 20th of September. The moctnato, or so-called 
grist- tax, extending even to the grinding of dried vege- 
tables, chestnuts, and acorns, has sent up the price of 
bread. Salt has risen at least a cent per pound. The 
further application of the system of heavy taxation is not 
likely to make other articles of prime necessity cheaper. 
And while this state of things exists, the facility of obtain- 
ing food has become much less for the poorer classes. 
The causes of this are to be sought in the want of employ- 
ers. It is the universal complaint that there is no work. 
Before the coming of the present rulers, the army of the 
pope, composed in great part of young men of some 
means, spent a great deal among the people. This source 
of gain ceased with the disbandment of the Papal troops, 
for it is notorious lippis et tonsoribus, that the men of 
the present contingent have barely enough daily allow- 
ance to keep body and soul together. Besides this, eccle- 
siastics spent their revenues, fixed by law and sure, with 
a liberal hand. Now, when they find difficulty in getting 
even what they cannot be deprived of ; now that confisca- 
tion hangs over their heads with menacing aspect; now 



Letter from Rome, January, 1871. 77 



that religious orders are called on to make immense out- 
lays to send their young men to places of safety — in one 
ease to the extent of six thousand dollars — it would be 
foolish to expect them to sacrifice what is necessary for 
themselves ; though, to do them justice, they are always 
willing to share their little with the poor. Dearth of for- 
eign ecclesiastics, and of foreigners in general, is another 
source of distress, and this is directly a consequence of the 
invasion. The result of all this is that there is more 
misery in the city of Rome than has been seen for many 
a day — beggars are more numerous in the streets, and 
needy families, ashamed to beg, suffer in silence or pour 
their tale of woe into the ear of the clergy, who are always 
honored with the confidence of the poor and afflicted. 
Surely this state of things is not an improvement on the 
plenty which characterized the rule of the pontiffs. We 
cannot say Rome in this respect has moved into a better 
sphere — that she has progressed. 

Security of person and property is another essential 
object of the attention of every state. No state that can- 
not guarantee this is deserving of the name of having a 
good government. Under the Papal rule, it is well known 
that not only in Rome did good order prevail, as the 
immense multitude present at the CEcumenical Council 
can attest, but that also on the frontiers of the territories 
governed by the pope, after the withdrawal of the French 
troops from Veroli and Anagni, the energy displayed by 
the Roman delegate was such as to liberate completely 
the provinces from the bands sprung from the civil strifes 
of southern Italy. The city of Rome itself was a model 
of good order and of personal safety. Now things are 
changed. Only a few days ago, a " guardia di pubblica 



78 Letter from Rome, January, 1871. 



sicurrezza " was stopped in the streets and robbed of his 
watch and revolver. There is not a day that has not in 
the daily papers its record of thefts and acts of personal 
violence. Only a few days ago, there was a sacrilegious 
robbery in the Church of St. Andrea della Valle. On the 
8th of December there was rioting with bloodshed in 
Rome. A band of young students, under the charge of 
a religious, were stoned on Sunday, January 15. On the 
1 6th, the Very Rev. Rector of the " Ospizio degli Orfan- 
elli " was struck with a stone. It would be easy to 
multiply examples, but those we have given are quite 
enough to show that progress in security of person 
and property has not been attained since the 20th of 
September, 1870. 

Then public morality in the centre of Christianity could 
not fail to be at a far higher standard, now that the 
regeneration of the city of Rome has been accomplished. 
What bitter illusions fortune delights in dispensing to 
those that trust her ! Before the entrance of Italian 
statesmen into Rome, vice and immorality did not dare 
raise their heads — they could not flaunt themselves on 
the public ways. Now there is a change, and the moral 
order of Italy has entered through the breach at the 
Porta Pia. We say no more ; the subject is a delicate 
one, and we therefore refrain from penning facts noto- 
rious in Rome. Surely, none who has received even 
an elementary training in virtue will deem this state 
of things progress — an elevation to a higher and more 
perfect state. 

But the king of Italy came to Rome to protect the 
independence of the sovereign pontiff, to save him from 
the bondage of foreign hordes. Now, as the pope is 



Letter from Rome, January, 1871. 79 



principally a spiritual sovereign, it is his spiritual power 
that most needs protection ; consequently, the king of 
Italy and his faithful servants have been most zealous 
in preventing acts or publications that would tend to 
diminish the respect due to the Holy Father. 

Incomprehensible, but true — the very opposite has 
taken place ! We have at hand the satirical paper, the 
Don Pirlone Figlio, of January 19. On its first page 
is a ridiculous adaptation of the heading used by the 
cardinal vicar in his official notifications to the faithful. 
The same page has an article grossly disrespectful to 
the sovereign pontiff, and insulting to the Belgian 
deputation, who have just come on to present the pro- 
test of their countrymen, and their contributions. The 
Holy Father is styled Giovanni Mastai detto Colui ex- 
disponibile anche lui ; the members of the deputation 
are given ridiculous names ; and the contributors of 
Peters Pence are blackbirds caught in a cage ; finally, 
a ridiculous discourse is put in the mouth of the pope, 
concluding with a benediction. The illustration repre- 
sents Pius IX. with a boot in his hand, in the act of 
giving it to the emperor of Germany, who figures as 
a cobbler. Such are the illustrations and articles one 
sees exposed to the public day by day. When we who 
have seen Rome under far different circumstances wit- 
ness these things, is it at all strange that we refuse to 
see "the general respect shown to ecclesiastics in the 
exercise of their sacred functions," even though on the 
faith of Lamarmora it be asserted to exist ? Can w r e 
be blamed for thinking that anything but progress in 
veneration of religion has been the result of the taking of 
Rome ? 



So Letter from Rome, January, 1871. 



After this, any of the advantages arising from the occu- 
pation of Rome can have no weight sufficient to warrant 
much attention — for they must be, as they are, material 
and of a low order — chiefly regarding facility of commu- 
nication and despatch in business matters, things desirable 
in themselves, but it would seem, purchased at a fearful 
sacrifice. 

Is this state of things to continue? Is the Italian king- 
dom on such a permanent basis that the Papacy has no 
hope of a change that may give it back its possessions ? 
Or can the kingdom of Italy be brought to make restitu- 
tion of what it has seized, without itself undergoing de- 
struction ? A word in reply to each of these queries. 
And, first, is this state of things to continue ? 

When we consider who the sovereign pontiff is, and 
consult the opinions of men famed for their foresight and 
statesmanship, it is difficult to deny that the restoration 
of the pontiff to his rights is very possible. Napoleon 
Bonaparte, although he afterwards made Pius VII. his 
prisoner, left recorded his opinion that it was impossible 
that the Pope should be the subject of any one sovereign, 
and that it was providential the head of the church had 
been given the possession of a small state to secure his 
independence. M. Thiers, in commendation of whom we 
need say nothing, as his reputation is world-wide, has 
clearly and forcibly proclaimed this very opinion. In the 
debates on the temporal power, in the French Senate in 
1867, his voice was heard calling on France to protect 
Rome, and it was his energy forced from the hypocrit- 
ical government of his country the famous word, uttered 
by Rouher, that struck terror into Italy — "Jamais." One 
would imagine that now Rome has fallen and France is 



Letter from Rome, January, 1871. Si 



reduced to the verge of desperation, no man of "liberal" 
political views would be foolhardy enough to risk his rep- 
utation by reiterating an opinion like this. Yet, strange 
to say, there is one who has been willing to run the risk, 
and that in the very Chamber of Deputies at Florence. 
Only a few weeks ago, the Deputy Toscanelli, a liberal, 
and, we learn, a free-thinker, with a courage, a strength 
of argument, a flow of wit that gained the respect and 
attention of the house, almost in the words of M. 
Thiers gave the same opinion. " In the days of the last 
of the Medici," said the distinguished deputy, " there 
was a court-jester riding a spirited horse down the Via 
Calzaioli, in Florence. The horse got the better of his 
rider, and started off at full speed. ' Ho ! Sor Fagioli,' 
cried out one of the crowd, ' where are you going to 
fall?' 'No one knows or can know,' was the jester's 
answer, as he held on with both hands. Just so is it with 
the government ; it has mounted a policy that is run- 
ning away with it, and neither it nor any one else knows 
where it is going to fall. The government has gone to 
Rome, and in Rome it cannot stay ; it cannot hold its 
own face to face with the Pope. I give you, then, this 
advice : leave Rome, declare it a free city under the 
protection of the kingdom of Italy." So much for the 
opinions of political men of eminence ; we will examine 
the question for a moment on its intrinsic merits. 

We know the sovereign pontiff in his official capacity 
of teacher of the whole church is infallible in declara- 
tions regarding faith or morals. But in other matters of 
policy, of fact, he has no guarantee against error beyond 
what is afforded him by the use of the means which 
he has at hand, the information of his advisers, and 



82 Letter from Rome, January, 1871. 



especially of the Sacred College of Cardinals. Suppose, 
for a moment, this means of information is done away 
with, or made a vehicle of untrue statements. Suppose 
unworthy men are artfully intruded on the pope, and 
act in accordance with instructions received from the 
rulers of Italy. Imagine Italy at war or on bad terms 
with the United States or England. A crafty states- 
man sees an opportunity of putting in a position to aid 
him in one or the other country an able man, through 
the influence of some high ecclesiastic, whose good 
opinion will have great weight with men of standing or 
with the people. The whole matter is artfully carried 
out. There is an understanding between the Italian 
statesman and his American or English friend ; both act 
cautiously and avoid alarming susceptibilities. The af- 
fair works' well. Persons around the pope are made to 
drop a word incidentally in praise of the virtue and 
ability of the one whom it is intended to raise to power. 
The pope in his relations with the bishops of foreign 
countries, speaking of the prospects of the church in 
good faith, speaks also to the ecclesiastic of whom we 
have made mention, and in favorable terms of the per- 
son in question. Who that knows human nature can 
fail to see the thorough nature of the influence thus 
used ? The crafty originators are the ones to blame, and 
the harm done is effected in perfect good faith by the 
unconscious instruments of their design. To show we 
are not building on our fancy, we turn to the pages of 
a man whose name all revere — Cardinal Wiseman. In 
his Recollections of the Last Four Popes, he speaks of the 
character of Pius VII. : 



Letter from Rome, January, 1871. 83 



" When no longer a monarch, but a captive— when bereft of all 
advice and sympathy, but pressed on close by those who, them- 
selves probably deceived, thoroughly deceived him, he committed 
the one error of his life and pontificate, in 1813. For there came to 
him men 'of the seed of Aaron,' who could not be expected to mis- 
lead him, themselves free and moving in the busiest of the world, 
who showed him, through the loopholes of his prison, that world 
from which he was shut out. as though agitated on its surface, and 
to its lowest depths, through his unbendingness ; the church torn to 
schism, and religion weakened to destruction, from what they 
termed his obstinacy. He who had but prayed and bent his neck to 
suffering was made to appear in his own eyes a harsh and cruel 
master, who would rather see all perish than loose his grasp on un- 
relenting but impotent jurisdiction. 

" He yielded for a moment to conscientious alarm; he consented, 
though conditionally, under false but virtuous impressions, to the 
terms proposed to him for a new concordat. But no sooner had his 
upright mind discovered the error, than it nobly and successfully 
repaired it." (Chap. IV.) 

Such are the words of a man writing after years of 
intercourse with the first men of Europe. They are in- 
structive words — for human nature is ever the same. 
There are men still in Italy who follow out closely the 
principles of Macchiavelli — to whom everything sacred 
or profane, no matter what veneration may have sur- 
rounded it, is but the means to self-aggrandizement and 
the satisfaction of ambition. It is for the nations of the 
world to say whether they are willing to allow the exist- 
ence of the permanent danger to themselves, arising from 
the subjection of the spiritual head of the church to any 
crowned head or even republic whatsoever. Perhaps of 
the two, the latter would be the more to be dreaded. 
The Roman mobs that drove Eugenius IV. from Rome, 
and pelted him as he went down the Tiber, or made 
many another pope seek safety in flight, could be easily 



84 Letter from Rome, January, 187 1. 



gotten together again, as the present residents of the 
Eternal City know only too well. 

We answer, then, our first query, and say that this state 
of things cannot last. Time, the great remedy of human 
ills, will solve this question, and establish the See of Peter 
on a perfectly independent basis — independent of all 
sovereign control, even if this be not done shortly 
through the armed interference of European powers. 

It is hardly necessary to inquire whether the Italian 
kingdom is so firmly constituted that no hope of restora- 
tion of the pope is to be seen. For ourselves, we think 
there are indications that point to a speedy dissolution 
of this state on the first breaking out of a war between 
Italy and any great power. Her policy is to avoid en- 
tangling alliances, and this she is following out, striving 
to propitiate the emperor of Germany for her leaning 
towards France. The first army that will enter the 
peninsula to aid the Pope will shiver Italy to fragments. 
The southern provinces have too lively a recollection of 
the days of plenty under their kings, and too painful an 
impression of heavy taxation and pro-consular domination 
of the Piedmontese race, to hesitate between submission 
to them and the regaining their own autonomy, which 
will make Naples again one of the queenly capitals of the 
world. 

One index of the general discontent or indifference is 
the small number of those who vote at the elections in 
proportion to those who are inscribed on the electoral 
lists. The motto proposed by the Unita Cattolica, the 
foremost Catholic journal of Italy — " Neither elected nor 
electors " — has been adopted and acted upon by very 
many throughout the country. We feel no difficulty in 



Letter from Rome, January, 1871. 85 



saying that the majority of the Italians are not with the 
House of Savoy, nor are they in favor of United Italy. 
The ruling power has the government and the command 
of the army, a fact that quite accounts for the existing 
state of things. 

Our third question, whether the kingdom of Italy can 
be brought to make restitution of the territories it has 
seized, without itself undergoing destruction, remains to 
be answered. We believe it cannot, unless half-meas- 
ures — always more or less dangerous — be adopted. The 
late spoliation is not more criminal than the first, and no 
amount of plebiscite can make it legitimate, any more than 
— to use the words of the able editor of the Unita 
Cattolica — the popular approbation of the condemnation 
of Jesus Christ legitimized the crucifixion. The claim, 
then, to restitution extends to the whole of the former 
provinces, justly held by the popes to supply them with 
the revenue needed to make them independent of the 
precarious contributions of the Peter's Pence, and which 
was none too large for that purpose. 

Whatever may come, we know the future of the church 
is in the hands of One in whose holding are the hearts of 
princes and peoples. What we have to do is to pray 
earnestly for our spiritual head, aid him by our means, 
console him with our sympathy, and give him whatever 
support, moral or other, it be in our power to offer. And 
while we do so, it is a joy to us to know we have lessened 
the grief of his hardships by what we have done hitherto, 
even gladdened the hours of his captivity. A few days 
ago, speaking to the Belgian deputation, Pius IX. said : 
" Belgium gives me very often proofs of her fidelity. 
Continue in the way in which you are walking ; do not 



86 Letter from Rome, January, 187 1 . 

allow your courage to fail. What is happening to-day 
is only a trial, and the church came into existence in 
the midst of trials, lived always amid them, and amid 
them she will end her earthly career. It is our duty to 
battle and stand firm in the face of danger. . . . We 
have an Italian proverb which says : ' It is one thing to 
talk of dying; quite another to die.' People speak very 
resignedly of persecutions, but sometimes it is hard to 
bear them. The world offers to-day a very sad spectacle, 
and particularly this our city of Rome, in which we see 
things to which our eyes have not been accustomed. 
Let us all pray together that God may soon deliver 
his church, and re-establish public order, so deeply 
shaken. Your efforts, your prayers, your pious pilgrim- 
ages, all tend to this end, and I therefore bless them 
with all my heart." May the words of the Holy Father 
find an echo in our hearts ; let us not lose courage, but 
keep up our efforts, so happily begun, and never rest 
till wrong be righted, until we see the most sublime 
dignity and power on earth freed from the surroundings 
that would seek to make it as little as themselves. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



v. 



THE ITALIAN GUARANTEES AND THE SOVEREIGN 

PONTIFF. 

{The Catholic World, July, 1871.) 



t\ of Italy, recast by the Chamber of Deputies, 
amended by the Senate, adopted by the Chamber as 
amended, and approved and signed by the king and 
his ministers, the project of the guarantees for the 
sovereign pontiff's independence has become a part of 
the law of the land. We are perfectly willing to believe 
that his majesty, regarding this scheme as promising 
the fullest amount of freedom it was possible to obtain 
from his parliament for the Head of the Church, 
signed it with a feeling of relief ; for if we are to 
credit the rumors, more or less well founded, one 
hears in Florence and in Rome, broken tables and 
furniture overturned bore witness to the unwillingness 
of the supreme authority in the state to permit the 
violation of the Papal territory or to accept the plebis- 
cite of the so-called people of Rome. Not so, how- 
ever, was it with the legislators of the kingdom. To 
them the Papacy has been and is a huge incubus, that 
disturbs their rest, frightens them in their dreams, and 
which can be got rid of in truth only by their waking 




proposed by the government 



88 



The Italia n Guarantees 



up to a sense of what their real duty is. Their aim has 
been, in dealing with it, to yield up as little as possible of 
their ill-gotten power over the successor of St. Peter, and 
to secure themselves as effectually as possible against the 
only power they ever feared — his spiritual weapons. This 
is the criterion by which we should study these guar- 
antees; by the light of it we propose to examine them, 
and to discuss their pretended advantages. 

When the Italian government, hurried on by the spirit 
of revolution, seized upon Rome during the complications 
of last autumn that insured impunity for the moment to 
the act, they found themselves face to face with the spir- 
itual ruler of the whole Catholic world, and with the 
fixed convictions or invincible prejudices of two hundred 
millions of men, who regarded the position in which the 
sovereign pontiff had been placed as not only against all 
law, but also hurtful to their best interests. How were 
they to deal with so delicate a question ? The situation 
of Europe might for a time delay the solution, but event- 
ually there must be an account given and satisfaction 
rendered to the Catholic world. The cabinet hit on the 
only means it could hope to use with any appearance 
of success, and the promises of the Minister of Foreign 
Affairs, Sig. Visconti Venosta, served as a decent pre- 
text to liberal governments not to interfere actively in 
the accommodation of things in Italy. These promises are 
contained in the despatches sent to different governments, 
during last winter, and published in the diplomatic doc- 
uments laid before the various legislative bodies of 
Europe during the past six months. To do the minister 
justice, he has stood out successfully against the extreme 
radical party in parliament, that opposed most violently 



And the Sovereign Pontiff. 89 



any idea of concessions such as he had designed for the 
independence of the sovereign pontiff, and his appeal 
to the loyalty of Italy brought down the applause of the 
house, and effectually destroyed the influence of his 
opponents. Still, even if we attribute to any other feel- 
ing than fear of foreign intervention the measures adopted, 
they are not for that reason intrinsically enhanced in 
value, nor are they anything more than the most the 
Italian government is capable or willing to do to protect 
the power of the pope. 

That power, be it well understood, is in the eyes of 
the rulers of Italy merely a spiritual power, for the tem- 
poral, they consider, was annihilated by the cannon that 
beat down the walls on the 20th of September, 1870, 
and by the plebiscite of the 2d of October following. 
How does this law of guarantees confirm the exercise 
of that power ? We shall see by referring to several 
of the articles, not quoting the law at length, as it has 
already appeared in the public journals. 

Article II. says, in the last clause: "The discussion 
of religious questions is entirely free." 

Article III. says that the sovereign pontiff may have 
his guards, "without prejudice to the obligations and 
duties resulting from such guards, from the existing 
laws of the kingdom of Italy." 

Article IV. contemplates the possibility of the govern- 
ment taking upon themselves the expenses of the mu- 
seums and library of the pontifical palaces. 

Article V. says these museums, library, collections of 
art and of archaeology, are " inalienable." 

Article VIII. forbids sequestration of papers merely 
spiritual in their character. 



90 



The Italian Guarantees 



Article XIII. declares that the ecclesiastical seminaries 
of Rome, and of the six suburban sees presided over 
by cardinals, are to continue subject to the Holy See, 
without any interference on the part of the scholastic 
authorities of the kingdom. 

Article XVI. says : " The dispositions of the civil laws 
with regard to the creation and the manner of existence 
of ecclesiastical institutions, and the alienation, of their 
property, remain in force." 

Article XVII. The recognition of the juridical effects 
of the spiritual and disciplinary acts, as well as of any 
other act of the ecclesiastical authority, belongs to the 
civil jurisdiction. Such acts, however, are void of effect 
if contrary to the law of the state or to public order 
or hurtful to the rights of private persons, and are 
subject to the penal laws if they constitute a crime. 

Let us take a cursory glance at these cullings from 
the " guarantees," and see if they conflict at all with 
the spiritual power of the pontiff. Before the twentieth 
of September, 1870, the whole of the city of Rome and 
the dependent provinces were presided over in spirituals 
by the pope, and all of the inhabitants were Catholics, 
except a few Jews, treated with charity, though not 
allowed to make proselytes. By this decree the door is 
thrown open to every sect that chooses to come and try to 
proselytize the Roman people. They must see as clearly 
as we do that the last clause of Article II. deals the most 
powerful and insidious blow at the spiritual power of the 
pope in spiritual matters, encouraging his people to spir- 
itual defection, or at least lessening him in their esteem 
as a spiritual teacher. This is too evident to need fur- 
ther dwelling on, and we pass to the next indictment. 



And the Sovereign Pontiff. 91 



The pope's guards are to protect him and execute 
his orders, but inasmuch as they are not on this ac- 
count freed from the obligations of Italian citizens by 
the tenor of Article III., it is quite easy to understand 
how in the course of time elements of discord may 
arise; and, therefore, in the use of his guards, the pope 
must conform to the civil code of the kingdom of Italy, 
or take the consequences referred to further on. 

Articles IV. and V. regard the library and museums of 
the Vatican and of other palaces. The original draught 
of the project declared these collections the property of 
the state. The criticism it excited on this account 
brought about the modifications we have here, which 
substitute inalienability for the asserted right of prop- 
erty, without adverting to the fact that such a modifi- 
cation implies dominion in the one making it, while 
there is contemplated a possible taking on themselves 
by the government of the expenses of these museums 
that certainly points to the same idea. 

The VII Ith Article forbids the sequestration of papers 
and documents of the ecclesiastical authorities merely 
spiritual in their nature. The inference is that any 
documents not merely spiritual may be seques- 
trated ; and, as doubts may arise, who is to decide ? 
Certainly not the church or the pope, for he is the 
accused; there is no umpire; and a strong police force 
is at the beck of the Italian government, and the ques- 
tion will be solved readily. 

The XHIth Article, regarding the ecclesiastical semi- 
naries and colleges, exempts them from the control of the 
scholastic authorities, but, with regard to their temporal 
•concerns, we are told in the XVIth Article they must be 



9 2 



The Italian Guarantees 



subject to the civil jurisdiction. We leave it to our prac- 
tical men of America to say whether or not the man who 
holds the purse-strings and manages the funds has any in- 
fluence on the people he pays or who are paid through him. 
In the case before us the Italian civil authorities are those 
who pay, having in many cases the full administration of 
the funds. We feel tempted to refer to the case of the 
Roman College, the funds of which have been withheld 
since the first of January, 1871. 

The first draught of Article XVII. was too strong. It 
said openly: In case of conflict between the civil and 
ecclesiastical powers, the supreme civil tribunal of the 
kingdom was to decide. This was toned down to suit 
better rather tender susceptibilities. The result we have 
in the clause quoted above, which says the same thing 
in other words, and in stronger terms, if we look to the 
penal sanction referred to. Here is the whole pith of the 
matter. "As long as it is possible for us to get on with- 
out dispute," says the government, "all well; but the 
moment a question arises, we must solve it." Moreover, 
as the legislative authorities have made the law, they can 
amend or alter it if they think proper, and there is and 
can be no guarantee that they will not. 

Such are the disadvantages created by the vexed pro- 
ject, which, from the amount of discussion it has caused, 
deserves the title of the Pons Asiuorum of the Italian 
parliament. 

There are several points in this law which have some 
title to be looked on as advantages, relatively to the con- 
dition in which the sovereign pontiff has been placed since 
the overthrow of his temporal sovereignty. These are 
the inviolability of the person of the sovereign pontiff, the 



And the Sovereign Pontiff, 



93 



payment of the monthly sum of fifty thousand dollars, the 
protection of the Conclave as well as of the pontiff in the 
discharge of duty, the immunity of ecclesiastics employed 
by him, the postal and telegraphic arrangements, and the 
abolition of the royal " placet " and " exequatur. '' But it 
is to be remarked that, in the first place, with regard to 
some, the dignity of the Head of the Church will not 
permit him to avail himself of them ; then, with reference 
to others, they are imperatively wrung from the Italian 
government by the public opinion of foreign nations ; 
while, lastly, respecting others, the government will always 
have it in their power to exercise a surveillance that 
renders the concessions more or less nugatory, and in 
nowise satisfactory to the people of Catholic and non- 
Catholic nations. 

But independent of all the above reasons, there are 
intrinsic motives that make any code of guarantees worth 
little more than the paper on which they are indited. 
All are agreed that the Head of the Church must be 
independent; the Italian government acknowledges it, 
and Catholics and non-Catholics proclaim it throughout 
the world. In what does this necessary independence 
consist ? It consists essentially in being free of undue 
influence from any source whatsoever. Xow, such free- 
dom can be obtained only by restoring the pope to the 
condition in which he was prior to the year i860. For 
we can imagine the several other conditions in which 
the pope might be placed. 

He may continue as he is at the present moment. 

He may be the privileged citizen of a Roman re- 
public. 



94 The Italian Guarantees 



He may be the sovereign ruler of the city of Rome, 
under the protection of the Italian government, together 
with other governments throughout the world. 

None of these conditions is a guarantee of his free- 
dom. 

In the first place, we suppose him to be in the condi- 
tion in which he is at the present moment. The reasons 
we have given above, the practical experience had of 
the protection given to the pope and those attached to 
him, the seizure of the encyclical, and other acts of 
which his eminence the Cardinal Secretary of State has 
complained publicly, the subjection a salary paid by the 
Italian government would bring with it, and the general 
suspicion to which his acts are liable, from the influence 
of the powerful government under which he lives — all 
make it impossible that this state of things should con- 
tinue. 

Nor is it possible that the sovereign pontiff should be 
the privileged and protected member of a Roman repub- 
lic. To tell the truth, the present state of things is pref- 
erable to that. Republics, and particularly a Roman 
republic, are too liable to commotion; a mob is too easily 
excited to violence, a demagogue is too likely to gain 
great influence over this city, to make it at all advisable 
that the pontiff should have republicans for his neigh- 
bors. A prince has duties to his people, to his dynasty, 
and to other nations that check him, and make him 
keep order in his realm ; whereas the common people 
are restrained by no such consideration, and a clamorous 
hostile demonstration, with a stoppage of supplies, would 
very probably be the answer to any act of the sover- 
eign pontiff that did not meet with their approbation. 



And the Sovereign Pontiff. 95 



The vicissitudes of the days of Cola di Rienzi are there 
to show how incompatible with the mobile masses of a 
republic is the necessarily unbending firmness of a moral 
ruler. Not much happier than the foregoing is the idea 
proposed by the able deputy of the Italian parliament, 
Signor Toscanelli, who would have Rome a free city 
under the sovereign control of the sovereign pontiff and 
protected by the Italian government. It would, practi- 
cally speaking, be impossible to eliminate all influence on 
the part of the government protecting and closely in 
material contact with the Roman Curia. Even suppos- 
ing that the maintenance of the pope and his dependents 
did not come from that government, it would not be 
advisable or satisfactory. In this case, the money for 
the support of the ecclesiastical authorities would have 
to come from foreign nations. Although this would save 
the sovereign pontiff from much of his subjection to the 
rulers of Italy, it would still leave him subject to influ- 
ence of another kind very undesirable. The point is a 
delicate one, but we will treat it with all due considera- 
tion for those concerned. In legislating for mankind, you 
have no right to expect heroic actions, and this more 
particularly if those actions pertain to the supernatural 
order. This rule is to be applied to the sovereign pon- 
tiffs as to everyone else. To their great honor, the sov- 
ereign pontiffs have stood nobly firm in the exercise of 
the duties of their exalted state; many a one has shed 
his blood for the faith, many a one has languished in 
chains for the good of his flock, many a one has braved 
the fury of crowned tyrants for the safety and well-being 
of the church of Christ. But above all praise as their 
conduct has often been, you have no right to put them 



96 



The Italian Guarantees 



in a position that requires the exercise of such heroic 
firmness. Now, what is the condition of a pope depend- 
ent on the precarious contributions of foreign nations for 
his support ? It is one in which an external influence is 
continually at work to check him in the free and impar- 
tial discharge of his duty ; it is one in which he is con- 
tinually forced to lay aside all human considerations of 
prudence and throw himself with fullness of faith on Di- 
vine Providence. The position is a sublime one, but for 
that very reason no man or body of men have any right 
to place him in it. If he sees fit to condemn some cher- 
ished opinion in a nation, the people cool in their devo- 
tion to him, and as the contributions of which we speak 
are voluntary, the disinclination to receive his decisions 
brings with it a disinclination to give spontaneously what 
had been so given before, and the direct consequence of 
every pontifical act unacceptable is very likely to be a 
diminution in the funds that come in for the support of 
the pontiff ; in fact, if we may be allowed the expres- 
sion, these contributions may be looked on as a kind of 
spiritual thermometer, that by their rise or fall indicate 
the warmth or the coolness of feeling towards the pope. 
In point of fact, it is well known that not a few prophe- 
sied, during the discussion of the question of the infalli- 
bility in the past year, that the passing of the decree 
would bring about a decided falling off in the Peter's 
Pence. Notwithstanding this, the sovereign pontiff threw 
himself upon Providence, and his hope was not deceived. 
To the honor of Catholics throughout the world be it 
said, the contributions of the Peter's Pence of to-day ex- 
ceed those of all other epochs, and enable the Holy 
Father to administer to the most pressing wants of the 



And the Sovereign Pontiff. 



97 



flock over which he personally and directly presides. 
The hand of Providence is certainly here, Such mani- 
festations of Providence, however, as we have said, no 
one has a right in legislating to look forward to, and 
therefore it is absolutely necessary that the Head of the 
Church should be the sovereign of a small state, large 
enough to save him from the necessity of tutelage, and 
yielding a yearly revenue sufficient to maintain him and 
those he must have around him with the decorum due to 
his condition. To this it may be objected, that his sub- 
jects will be deprived of many advantages enjoyed by 
free nations. We are very sceptical about these advan- 
tages. The progress of Rome under Pius IX. had been 
solid and satisfactory ; and, on the other hand, the Roman 
subjects of the pontiff will have many advantages to 
which other nations are often strangers : the advantage 
of light taxation, the advantage of laws repressing immo- 
rality, the advantage of peace with its delightful arts, the 
advantage of an enlightened protection of science and of 
the fine arts, and then the great material advantage of 
seeing their city the resort of the cultivated and wealthy 
classes of all nations, who flock to Rome to see the suc- 
cessor of St. Peter, and to enjoy the gorgeous and im- 
posing ceremonial of the church. For far less advantages 
than these we deprived the citizens of a portion of our 
country of the great privilege of their political franchise ; 
of all nations we should be the last to find fault with the 
infliction of a similar disqualification, of much more ap- 
parent harm than real, and which is compensated for an 
hundred-fold. And this we say all the more earnestly 
because, in the case of Rome, it is not the welfare of a 
collection of states that is provided for, but the peace and 
good order of all nations of the earth. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



VI. 



MAX MULLER'S ••CHIPS."* 

{The Catholic World, July, 1872.) 

MR. MAX MULLER, the learned German pro- 
fessor, and Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford, 
wrote, and in 1S6S published, a collection of essays 
on the science of religion which he calls Chips from 
a German Workshop. He tells us this title was given 
him by the late Chevalier Bunsen, who, on advising 
him to undertake the translation of the Sacred Book 
of the Brahmins, the Rig-Veda, bade him give, from 
time to time, to the public, some chips from his 
workshop. The intensely absorbing and delightful nature 
of his studies is to be seen very clearly by these specimens. 
They embrace two of the most important and most 
attractive branches of human science — that of the varied 
forms of human thought in its relations to God; and that 
of the multifold lan^ua^es of the earth, and their mutual 
relations. Prof. MtiUer's philological investigations are 
confined chiefly to the Indo- Germanic family, and confirm 
beyond possibility of cavil the intimate connection between 
the many branches of that family — the Sanskrit, the Brah- 
manic language in use at present, the Persian, the Greek, 

* Chips from a German Workshop. By Max Miiller. New York : 
Scribner & Co. 

98 



Max Miillers " Chips. " 99 



the Latin with its offshoots, the Italian, the French and 
the Spanish, the Celtic and the English. In exemplifying 
what he says on this subject, he speaks of the meaning of 
the word Veda. Rig- Veda, he tells us, means praise of 
knowledge or wisdom — Rig or Rich signifying praise or 
hymn, and Veda, knowledge or wisdom. He calls our 
attention to this word Veda in support of the theory of 
the connection of the Aryan or Indo- Germanic group of 
languages. The root of it, or the word deprived of its 
final vowel — Ved — is to be seen by substituting the inter- 
changing consonants in the English words wit, wot, the 
German weiss, Gothic vait, Anglo-Saxon wat, Greek old a, 
to which may be added the Latin word video, to see, 
evidently closely connected with this Sanskrit word 
signifying to know, for knowledge is intellectual vision. 

What impresses us most, at first sight, is the practical 
conclusion to be drawn from the advanced state of philo- 
logical studies. We have here a striking proof of the 
unity of the race of man. Max Miiller speaks of this 
proof in favor of the unity of the Aryan races as beyond 
gainsaying ; words are there to establish the truth. Now, 
if we see such differently constituted peoples — such as the 
English and the Hindoo, the French and the Persian, the 
Celt and the Italian — all members of one family, can any 
one be so rash as to wish to exclude from fellowship with 
that family the tawny Arab, the swarthy Malay, or the 
dark son of Africa, simply because they are to be classed 
under the heads of Semitic and Turanian ? It is well 
known among physiologists that the differences of facial 
angles and cranial thickness constitute nothing essen- 
tial ; while the investigations of national thought and 
customs, hitherto veiled by unintelligible languages, tend 



IOO 



Max Miillers "Chips." 



continually to demonstrate and confirm the unity of man, 
to show that all men are of one common stock, of one 
man and of one woman, all made after the one type — < 
that which exists, as the Bible tells us, in God. So 
far, in fact, is real science from doing harm to revela- 
tion, that when it attains its perfection it confirms the 
truths that have been revealed. 

Whence we may draw this conclusion, that men who 
are wise will take care to have revelation for their guide, 
even in science ; they will, it is clear, be saved from 
going astray, since their ultimate examinations confirm 
its truth. It is not unfrequently the case that the eager 
scientific man, by a logical process, draws his conclusion 
without the slightest suspicion of error in his premises. 
It is no wonder he is tenacious of his conclusion ; but 
how often are his t ideas overthrown by " chance," that 
strange discoverer of more than one great treasure of 
the human race ! And how often sober, thoughtful men, 
meeting to determine the basis on which they stand, 
have to say, as did the Geological Congress of Paris in 
1867 : " The state of the science is not such as to enable us 
to make deductions iv holly free from danger of error /" or, 
certainly it is most just that we should love science and 
follow it faithfully, but always with an eye to that old 
and familiar adage, — " It is human to err." There is 
really nothing after all that saves a man from mistakes 
and confusion so much as a proper estimate of his own 
conclusions, and a readiness to have them corrected by 
others. It is a habit of mind that distinguishes really 
great men, like the sounder portion of the Prehistorical 
Congress of Bologna, in the autumn of 1871 : "There is 
nothing in prehistorical discoveries that is in contradic- 



Max Miillers " Chips. 



101 



tion with revelation." Bacon has bid us all put aside the 
idola, and thus free our minds from prejudice. We 
should begin by banishing the idol of self, the reliance on 
our own judgment, so as to be ready at once to abandon 
cherished ideas, and to look on the principles of science 
as more or less liable to be one day, by further investiga- 
tion, shown to be other than we think them. This is all 
the more important because false principles always do 
practical harm, and, if nothing else, they retard the at- 
tainment of what we are searching for, in putting us on 
the wrong path. We do not wish to be thought to con- 
demn all scientific principles as one day liable to be 
proven false. There are some, the essential agreement 
of whose subject and predicate absolutely excludes all 
danger of error, others which the constant experience of 
the human race has shown to be true, such as, for in- 
stance, the mathematical, and many of those that form 
the basis of natural science. These do not contradict 
revelation, and will never be proven false. The history 
of the past, however, is too full of the debris of systems 
of every kind that any one of solid information should 
not take warning from them, and be on his guard against 
looking on any proposition in natural science as irrefrag- 
able which the concordant testimony of men since the 
enunciation of it has not shown to be so. The Ptole- 
maic system, after an undisputed sway, yielded before 
the assaults of Copernicus and Galileo, and its solid 
spheres, whose music filled the poet's mind with delight, 
and charmed the privileged spirits to whom it was given 
to hear it, came down in awful ruin, and their sounds 
were hushed for ever. Then those whose years did not 
begin with the century can recall how eagerly they drank 



102 



Max Miillers "Chips." 



in the doctrine of the imponderable principles ; and lo ! 
what has become of them ? The progress of the age has 
substituted for it the teaching of the unity of forces, and 
motion answers for them all. The solidity of the sun 
and its dark spots, under the telescope and the com- 
bined investigations of astronomers, have disappeared, 
and gaseous substance and interruption in its continuity 
have taken the place of both. And in the recent brilliant 
discoveries in regard to the constituent gases of the sun, 
who is to make us sure that the lines in the spectrum, by 
which we profess to know the existence in the sun of cer- 
tain determinate objects, may not be produced by other 
causes of which we know nothing ? All these theories, 
we grant, have great probability in their favor, and we 
do not cite them with any intent to discredit the labors 
of the gifted men who have formed them ; but it is wise 
not to look on them as the end of all investigation and 
beyond all controversy. As we think of these vicissi- 
tudes of science, there occur to us, though not in a spirit 
of disregard for true science, the words written long ago : 
" I have seen the trouble which God hath given the sons 
of men to be exercised in it. He hath made all things 
good in their time, and hath delivered the world to their 
consideration, so that man cannot find out the work 
which God hath made from the beginning to the end." 
(Eccles. iii. 10, n.) This, however, is a digression; let 
us return to our Chips. 

By far the most important topic treated of by Prof. 
Miiller is the knowledge of God existing among the 
varied nations of men. He gives great weight, and de- 
servedly, to the result of his observation in this respect, 
and we can readily understand why he should lay so 



Max Miillers "Chips." 



103 



much stress on the importance of the study of the 
" science of religion," or the comparative study of the 
different religions of the earth. As a matter of erudi- 
tion, it must always be a subject of the greatest interest, 
not only in itself, but also because it serves to illustrate 
the words of the Apostle to the Romans, ch. i. 18-20: 
" For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against 
all ungodliness and injustice of those men that detain 
the truth of God in injustice : because that which is 
capable of being known* of God is manifest in them : for 
God hath manifested it unto them. For the invisible 
things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly 
seen, being understood by the things that are made; his 
eternal power also, and divinity, so that they are inexcus- 
able." We shall have occasion to return to these words. 
Here we may remark that this knowledge of God that 
transpires in all the citations the learned Orientalist has 
laid before us, is nothing more than what as Christians 
we expected to hear. But in this connection we have 
to say that the contrary effect is produced to that in- 
tended by Prof. Miiller. This corroboration of the words 
of St. Paul, uttered more than eighteen centuries ago, 
and proclaimed long before by the author of the Book of 
Wisdom, ch. xiii., proves that, so far from the religions 
of the earth meriting praise for their reference to a Su- 
preme Being, they deserve to be censured because they 
detained the truth in darkness — in injustice. The words 
of the professor are : " We shall learn [from this com- 

* See Kuhner's Gr. Grammar, translated by Messrs. Edwards and Taylor, 
London and New York, 1859, § 234 (i.), with regard to the force of the ver- 
bal adjective. The word in the Greek text of Tischendorf, Ed. Sept., is 
yvoo6rdy. 



Max Miillers " Chips 



parative study] that there is hardly one religion which 
does not contain some important truth ; truth sufficient 
to enable those who seek the Lord, and feel after him, to 
find him in the hour of their need." The first portion of 
this assertion is true ; the second is incorrect in its ex- 
pression, and dangerous in its tendency. It is incorrect 
in its expression, inasmuch as it attributes to these relig- 
ions, as such, the possession of truth — not all, to be sure, 
but some truth. We say, on the contrary, that the truth 
contained in these various religious systems is the com- 
mon inheritance of the human mind. 

The light of Almighty God's countenance shines on us 
all, no matter who we are. The Psalmist asks : " Quis 
ostendet nobis bona ? " and he answers : " Signatum est 
super nos lumen vultus tui, Doniine / " It is wrong, there- 
fore, to give credit to a false system for the truth it has 
enveloped in darkness. And the reason of this is palpable. 
If we turn to the words of the apostle, as given above, do 
we find him giving credit to the false religions of mankind 
for the truth they contain ? Anything but this. He says: 
" The invisible things of him, from the creation of the 
world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things 
that are made ; his eternal power also, and divinity, so 
that they are inexcusable. Because, when they knew 
God, they did not glorify him as God. . . . And they 
changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the like- 
ness of the image of a corruptible man, and of birds and 
four-footed beasts, and of creeping things." Here we 
have a sentence pronounced against these very religions 
our author speaks of as containing sufficient truth to 
enable those who seek the Lord and feel after him, to 
find him in the hour of their need. The apostle con- 



Max Miillers "Chips." 



demns them because " they detained the truth of God in 
injustice." 

This is to be said of these false religions even at their 
best. But what is to be said of them, when we take into 
consideration the immense majority of those among the 
heathen who do not attain to any refined spirituality, but 
are engrossed in the material, sensual forms of idolatry, like 
the conservative Parsees, so graphically described in the 
book before us ? We must therefore conclude that, grant- 
ing Prof. Miiller intended to refer to man's natural knowl- 
edge or his reason as a means of knowing God, to which 
the apostle bears witness, he has used an incorrect form of 
speech in attributing to these religions efficacy in finding 
God. It would have been in every way better to write 
that, in spite of the errors of these various systems, there 
was still light enough left to man, through his reason, to 
lead him to God — a truth not only substantiated by the 
teaching of theologians, but, as we have seen, expressly 
laid down in Holy Writ. 

We have said the assertion of our author is not only 
incorrect in its form, but dangerous in its tendency. That 
tendency, with all respect to Prof. Muller's expressed 
opinions, is latitudinarian; it would lead one to think that, 
after all, the heathen and all professing a false religion are 
in a comparatively safe state. If this be so, why do we find 
the apostle assaulting those systems so uncompromisingly, 
and asserting that the heathen are inexcusable ? And 
how do we reconcile with this theory the words of the 
Gospel, " Unless ye be born again of water and the Holy 
Ghost, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven ? " 
True, there is the baptisma Jlaminis, the resource of those 
who have not the blessing of the actual sacrament ; but 



io6 



Max Miillers "Chips." 



even this requires a rejection, absolute or implied, of the 
false system, and the act of faith in the true God, accom- 
panied by a firm will of doing whatever it may be known 
he asks of a sincere soul. The language of the great 
theologians is certainly not in any way favorable to the 
safety of those who follow a false religion. They tell us 
that those who among the pagans of old were saved, 
were justified by their faith in a true God and in the 
Redeemer to come. The doctor of grace, the great 
St. Augustine, whose intellect was one of the most re- 
markable of any age, says in Serm. 3 on the 36th Ps. y 
" All who were just, from the beginning of the world, 
have Christ as their head. For they believed he was 
to come, whom we believe to have come, already ; 
by faith in him they were saved, as we are." Then 
in the Comm. on the 128th Ps., he writes : " Has 
the church only existed now ? The church is of old ; 
from the time the saints were called the church is 
on earth. Once it existed only in Abel, and was 
warred against by a wicked and perfidious brother, 
Cain. Once the church was only in Enoch, and he 
was taken away from the wicked. Once the church 
was only in Noah's house, and it suffered from all 
those who perished by the flood, and only the ark 
floated on the waters and escaped to the dry land. 
Once the church was only in Abraham, and we know 
how much he suffered from the wicked. The church 
existed only in Lot, and in his house in Sodom, and 
he bore with the iniquity and perversity of the 
Sodomites, until the Lord freed him from them. The 
church began to exist in the people of Israel, and 
it suffered at the hands of Pharaoh and the Egyptians. 



Max Miillers "Chips." 



107 



And in the very church itself, amid the people of 
Israel, there began to flourish a number of holy souls : 
Moses and other saints suffered from the wicked Jews. 
We come at last to our Lord Jesus Christ ; the Gospel 
has been preached, and he has said in the Psalms : ' I 
have brought the tidings, and I have spoken, and 
they are multiplied beyond number.' " (See also the 
writings of the same father against the Donatists.) 
The same idea of the necessity of faith in Christ is 
found constantly in the teaching of the church and 
in the writings of the fathers. 

We ask after this, who deserve most credit as ex- 
ponents of the essential requisites of salvation — the 
early fathers of the church, who explain the words of 
the apostle, " Without faith it is impossible to please 
God," in the sense we have here in St. Augustine, 
and which, too, is had in the ancient Athanasian 
Creed ; or gentlemen like our author, whose ideas of 
Christianity, even when they express them clearly, 
differ so widely from what was once held as revealed 
truth, and who, moreover, -cannot come to an under- 
standing among themselves as to what the truth of 
Christ is ? And if we must give the preference to the 
former, what are we to say of an opinion that serves 
to lull people into a false security regarding that 
which is, of all things, the most vital in its importance 
and consequences ? 

Professor Miiller rightly says that the knowledge of 
the false religions of the world makes us appreciate 
more the Christian religion. Had he taken the view 
we have given, he would have had a vastly greater 
appreciation of it. He would not have put it in com- 



io8 



Max Miillers "Chips? 



parison with other religions, as differing from them by 
a superior degree of excellence, but would have shown 
that they differed essentially, as right differs from 
wrong, as truth from error, and therefore he would, 
while speaking charitably of individuals and leaving 
them to the judgment of God, infinitely just, have 
condemned and rejected these false systems of worship 
as the curse of the unhappy race of Adam. As we 
have said before, we are not inclined to charge Prof. 
Miiller with the full consequences of his assertions, 
since in several places of his work he gives his un- 
qualified acknowledgment of the claims of Christianity. 
Still we cannot but look on his loose assertions as the 
result of the rationalistic spirit that has begun so 
rapidly to pervade the most conservative of English 
universities. Only a few years ago, when called to 
give his testimony before the Board of Inquiry of the 
House of Lords regarding the state of the universities, 
Canon Liddon said that this tendency to rationalism 
had come in with the change in the system of studies 
and the introduction of the higher philosophical 
branches, and that it was making headway among the 
students in a marked manner. Nor, when we see 
those at the head of the university decide, as they did 
lately, that the Thirty-nine Articles are not to be in- 
sisted on for examination except in case of those who 
are candidates for the honorary degrees, and when we 
hear in our own country a board of Anglican bishops 
declare that the word " regeneration " in the formula 
of infant baptism does not imply any moral change in 
the one baptized — it does not seem to us that we are 
doing Prof. Miiller injustice in thinking that he, a lay 



Max Miillers t( Chips." 



109 



professor in the university directed by the Anglican 
Church, has, it may be unconsciously, taken in not a 
little of the leaven of rationalism. 

To this may be referred his translation of the text 
of St. Justin, Ap. i., § 46, when he makes this Chris- 
tian philosopher say, " Christ is the first begotten of 
God, and we have already proved him to be the very 
Logos (or universal Reason) of which mankind are all 
partakers." In the Edit, of the Congr. of St. Maurus 
of the Works of St. Justin, this word universal does 
not occur ; the Greek text has simply the accusative 
" Logon," and the Latin simply " Rationem." Cer- 
tainly all Catholic theologians hold this doctrine of St. 
Justin, and teach that the Logos or Verbum or Ratio is 
the infinite wisdom of the Godhead, by which God 
understands himself and all things in himself, and 
that all created wisdom or reason is but a participation 
of that infinite Reason or Word. But in these days, 
when the locutions, universal soul, universal intellect, 
universal being, are used so much in a pantheistical 
sense, we think an author can hardly find fault with 
those who very probably misunderstand him when he 
uses expressions so liable to be misinterpreted, and 
charge him with some tendency which he seems in 
other places to disclaim. It seems to us the learned 
professor should have taken all the greater care in his 
translation, as St. Justin (in his Ap. ii. § 7) disclaims 
expressly all pantheistic teaching, which he declares to 
be " foreign to all sound thought, reason, and mind." 

To show we do not wish to be unfair to this distin- 
guished scholar, we will do him the justice to cite his 
condemnation of the pantheistic spirit of the times. He* 



I IO 



Max Miillers "Chips." 



is speaking of Barthelemy St. Hilaire's History of 
Buddhism, and he quotes the words of the preface of 
that writer : 

" This book may offer one other advantage, and I regret to say 
that at present it may seem to come opportunely. It is the mis- 
fortune of our times that the same doctrines which form the founda- 
tion of Buddhism meet at the hands of some of our philosophers 
with a favor which they ill deserve. For some years we have seen 
systems arising in which metempsychosis and transmigration are 
highly spoken of, and attempts are made to explain the world and 
man without either a God or a Providence, exactly as Buddha did. 
A future life is refused to the yearnings of mankind, and the im- 
mortality of the soul is replaced by the immortality of works. God 
is dethroned, and in his place they substitute man, the only being, 
we are told, in which the Infinite becomes conscious of itself. 
These theories are recommended to us sometimes in the name of 
science, or of history or philology, or even of metaphysics ; and 
though they are neither new nor very original, yet they can do 
much injury to feeble hearts. 

And a few lines further on : 

" It. would be useful, however, if the authors of these modern 
systems would just cast a glance at the theories and destinies of 
Buddhism. It is not philosophy in the sense in which we under- 
stand this great name, nor is it religion in the sense of ancient 
paganism, of Christianity, or of Mohammedanism ; but it con- 
tains elements of all worked up into a perfectly independent doc- 
trine ; acknowledges nothing in the universe but man, and obsti- 
nately refuses to recognize anything else, though confounding man 
with nature in the midst of which he lives. Hence all those 
aberrations of Buddhism, which ought to be a warning to others." 
(P. 203, vol. i.) 

We have one other charge against the learned pro- 
fessor for what, though savoring a little of rationalism, 
more particularly regards the Catholic Church. He 
says that " as the Oriental creeds degenerated into 
•grosser forms, so Christianity degenerates into Jesuitism 



Max Mullers "Chips." 



1 1 1 



and Mormonism " (p. 185). We grant that the author 
is striving to be fair to the pagans, and shows an un- 
willingness to condemn them as a whole on account 
of the corrupt practices of a portion of them. But in 
doing so he has shown himself most unjust to a dis- 
tinguished Order in the Catholic Church, whose piety, 
virtue, and learning claim for them everywhere from 
Christians a tribute of respect and gratitude, and no- 
where more so than in our own free land. It is really 
lamentable to see what we must call a total want of 
knowledge in a person of such extensive information 
and real ability as Prof. Miiller. 'Tis strange that it 
did not occur to him that there was a great incon- 
gruity in coupling the Society of Jesus with the corrupt 
and sensual community of the Mormons, and it is 
only another lesson to put us on our guard against 
prejudice, which has so wonderful a power in pervert- 
ing the judgments of men so worthy of respect for 
their zeal in the cause of truth. 

This undeserved condemnation of the Jesuit Fathers 
is not the only error into which Prof. Miiller's dislike 
of Catholicity has betrayed him. On page 190 he 
speaks of the Buddhist ceremonies, and in a foot-note 
refers to the work of the Abbe Hue, in which he de- 
scribes his travels in China and Thibet, and remarks 
the curious coincidence between the rites of the reli- 
gion of the Grand Lama and the forms of Catholic 
worship. Our author tells us that the Abbe Hue 
pointed out the similarities between the Buddhist and 
Roman Catholic ceremonials with such naivete that, to 
his surprise, he found his delightful Travels in Thibet 
placed on the Index. We confess our surprise at this 



I 12 



Max Miillers "Chips." 



information. We never heard of the abbe's work 
having been signed with " the black mark of Peter," 
but we have heard the book very highly praised by 
persons who would hardly have praised it had there 
been anything in it to merit the censures of the 
church. We have, too, at hand a copy of the Index 
coming down to six years after the publication of the 
Travels in TJiibet, but after a careful search have not 
been able to find in it the name either of Abbe Hue 
or of this work. Moreover, it strikes us as very un- 
likely that this writer should have suffered for what 
has been stated pointedly by authors of the church 
from the first a^es down to our time. Had Prof. 
Miiller turned his attention to Tertullian's book, De 
Pr&scriptione H&reticorum, he would have found at 
§ 40 the following passage : 

'•'Who is to interpret the sense of what may further heresy? 
The devil, forsooth, whose office it is to distort the truth ; who rivals 
by the mysteries of the idols the very actions of the divine sacra- 
ments. He, too, baptizes some as believers and faithful ; he prom- 
ises the putting off of sin by the laver ; and, if I remember aright, 
Mithras there signs his soldiers on the forehead, celebrates the 
offering of bread, and uses the image of the resurrection, and gains 
the crown through the sword (martyrdom). What shall I say 
more ? that he destines his high-priest for the nuptials of but one 
(wife)? that he has his virgins? that he has his celibates ? But if 
we consider the superstitions of Xuma Pompilius, if the priestly 
duties, emblems, and privileges, the sacrificial service and instru- 
ments, and the vessels of sacrifice, and the strangeness of their ex- 
piations and votive gifts, has not the devil manifestly imitated the 
observances of the Jewish law ? " 

In the seventeenth century Natalis Alexander, in his 
Ecclesiastical History* (vol. ii. diss. iii. art. 3, §3, No. 

* See, also, St. Justin, Ap. 1, Q 66, ad finem, de Cultu Mithrae. 



Max Miillers " Chips." 



vii.) replying to the objections of Spencer, in his Dis- 
sertation No. 3 on the Ritual Lams of the Hebrews, 
says: "It is far more probable that the devil, the 
rival of God, inspired the heathen to use in the rites 
of their divinities, or to carry about with solemn 
pomp, arks or mystic vases containing something hid- 
den (arcanum)." than that the Israelites took their idea 
from them ; ' and further on : " Who does not see that 
the conclusion can be drawn by just and better right ? 
Therefore, the beaten vases had their origin in the 
rivalry of the evil spirit seizing on all that was splen- 
did in the worship of God, and turning it to his own 
worship." There are besides several rites well known 
to have existed among the heathen after the coming 
of Christ that bear so close a resemblance to Christian 
and Jewish forms, that we are warranted in following 
those archaeologists who attribute them to imitation of 
the usages of revealed religion. Take, for instance the 
taurobolium or criobolium, or baptism by the blood of 
a bull or goat. In this ceremony the person undergo- 
ing it was placed in a pit with a kind of sieve over his 
head, through which the fresh blood of the animal 
was made to fall upon his whole body. What is this 
but the corruption of baptism, the idea of redemption 
through blood, and of the sprinkling with blood that 
took place by divine command in the old law ? It 
stands to reason that as the Christian religion gained 
influence, paganism would, by seizing on what was 
marked in it and perverting it to its own uses, strive to 
regain its credit by an imitation which in some way 
would deceive the ignorant. Prof. Miiller can see from 
this that Catholics are not unaccustomed to making 



H4 



Max Mutter's "Chips." 



such contrasts, and that they are far from fearing 
them. And as for the case in point, history tells us 
that St. Thomas evangelized India and very probably 
the countries adjacent to it, while we know that St. 
Francis Xavier, as narrated in his life, found decided 
traces of Christianity among some of the Indians, 
though they had not the priesthood. This being the 
case, we can readily comprehend how the followers of 
Buddha should have adopted many of the forms in use 
among Christians, even the recitation of psalms, which 
we know from the New Testament to have been in 
use among the apostles, who, we are told, " went out 
from the supper-room after reciting a hymn with their 
Master." 

Such are the remarks we have thought well to 
make in the interest of truth in regard to these 
volumes of Prof. Miiller, which, aside from these ob- 
jectionable features, are full of learning and of interest- 
ing information, imparted in an easy and elegant style. 
They will be of value to the scholar, especially to 
those whose occupations do not allow them to conse- 
crate much time to researches such as those in which 
the professor is engaged. They will have the effect 
of confirming the believer in the truth of Christianity, 
and of making him thankful for the gift of a faith 
that has saved him from such fearful enthrallment of 
mind and body as he beholds his fellow-men con- 
demned to in the many forms of Eastern paganism. 
It is true those who are not favorable to positive re- 
ligious teaching will wrest not a little of what is said 
to their own damage — a danger we have tried to 
point out. Still the learned author will, after all, be 



Max Miillers "Chips." 



justified in remarking that, if such be the case, it is 
but another exemplification of the fact that the ser- 
pent draws poison from the same plant from which 
the bee sips its honey. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



VII. 



ST. PETER'S ROMAN PONTIFICATE. 



{The Catholic World, December, 1872.) 




HE history of mankind presents us innumerable 



1 facts that strike the reader with astonishment, 
and tax his ingenuity to its utmost to explain. The 
sudden fall of nations from the height of prosperity to 
misery and subjection, the invasion of hordes of bar- 
barians to substitute their uncouthness and ferocity for 
the polish and civilization of centuries, the apparent 
vocation of some one nation, at different epochs, to 
assume a preponderance over all others in the govern- 
ment of the world, the appearance of some one great 
mind that shone like a sun amid the galaxy of in- 
tellect, revolutionizing his time, and then setting, with- 
out leaving any one to continue his work ; all these 
facts confuse the mind, and, when man has lost the 
light that was sent into this world to guide him, seemed 
to him but the bitter irony of destiny. Not so, how- 
ever, are they viewed by him to whom revelation has 
imparted its illumining rays. He sees Providence every- 
where, and, knowing some wise end has been in- 
tended by the Creator whose power conserves and di- 
rects the evolutions of the planets and the vicissitudes 
of human life, he is encouraged to inquire into the 



St. Peter s Roman Pontificate. 1 1 7 

end for which such wonderful events have been brought 
about. 'Twas by- this light the great Bishop of Hippo 
saw the providential disposition of the changes that 
took place in the world ; looked on all history but as 
the preparation and continuation of the master-work 
of God — his church. 'Twas by this light that, follow- 
ing in the footsteps of St. Augustine, Bossuet under- 
stood the relations of such different facts, and showed 
their connection in his Universal History. These men, 
and those who, like them, have studied the history of 
the nations of the earth, had no difficulty in realizing 
the relation of all these facts, and in looking on them 
as so many confirmations of the truth of Christianity ; 
but those who are without faith stand aghast at the 
inexplicable phenomena they see before them, and of 
all none so sets at naught their judgment and defies 
their explanation as the greatest, the most persistent, 
the most important of all historical facts — the existence 
of the Catholic Church. They see it everywhere ; 
modifying everything ; setting at defiance all calcula- 
tion ; and when, according to human judgment, it 
should cease to exist, coming forth from the ordeal 
purer, stronger, more brilliant and powerful than before. 
Yet, they are not willing to learn by experience, but 
look forward to a day when an expedient or a means 
will be discovered to destroy in its turn this gigan- 
tic fabric that appears to scorn the ravages of time 
and the fury of tempests, just as the Jews look for- 
ward to the Messiah who is to deliver them from cap- 
tivity among the nations. In their useless hope, they 
leave nothing untried, and often scruple not at what in 
their private capacity they might scorn — distortion of 



1 1 8 St. Peter's Roman Pontificate. 

history and downright calumny. No human institu- 
tion could ever have withstood the array of powerful 
enemies the church of Christ has had since she first 
went forth from Mount Sion. No age has ever seen 
her without them ; sometimes fierce persecutors, some- 
times insidious plotters, sometimes open impugners of 
her dogmas ; at other times dangerous foes, cloaking 
their hostility under the garb of devotion that they 
might better strike deep into her bosom the poison 
with which, in their foolish hate, they fancied they 
were to deprive her of life. But the spouse of Christ 
has always cast them from her, and walked majestically 
over the ruins they themselves had brought about, 
and this she will ever do. And why ? Because she 
does not lean on a broken reed nor put her trust in 
an arm of flesh. She bears about her a charm that 
defies all attack — the protection of the Most High — 
and presents to all the proof of her holy character, 
those motives of credibility, which, as they were in- 
tended for all time, so now as on the day of Pente- 
cost, accompany her wherever she goes, invincibly 
proving to the mind of man her own divine origin 
and her claim to his obedience. As she was one in 
the union of all her children in one faith and in one 
baptism ; as she was holy in the lives of those that 
obeyed her ; as she was catholic and universal, em- 
bracing peoples of all climes and of all ages ; as she 
was apostolic in her origin and in the succession of 
her ministry, so is she now, one, holy, catholic, and 
apostolic in the succession of her priesthood and in the 
infallibility of her head. As she was able to point to 
the wonders wrought by the apostle in the name of 



St. Peters Roman Pontificate. 119 



her divine founder, so now can she point to the 
miracles of her chosen servants : an Alphonsus de Li- 
guori, a Paul of the Cross, a Ven. Pallotta, a Maria 
Taigi, a Maria Moerl, and a host of others, down to 
the martyred victims of communistic fury. She can 
show in the nineteenth century, as she did in the first, 
a host of martyrs ; old men and youths, matrons and 
tender virgins, who, when arraigned for their faith 
before the Chinese mandarin, fulfilled the promise of 
Christ, and gave inspired answers, as did the glorious 
children of the early church, and sealed, too, with 
their blood the belief they held dearer than life. 

We can understand, then, how the church can look 
fearlessly at the storms that ever and anon burst upon 
her, because, built on the solidity of her belief, she 
knows the waves can but break harmless at her feet. 
She has no need of human means to secure her ex- 
istence, for that has a promise of perennial duration. 
The condition, too, of her being is one of struggle and 
warfare, and, when it comes upon her, her only act is 
to oppose the shield of faith and the sword of the 
word of God — her only arms the truth. And as it is 
written that truth will prevail, so in every battle in 
which she has been engaged she has come forth at 
last with victory inscribed on her banner — victory 
through the truth. 

We have said that the condition of her being is 
struggle and warfare. This, therefore, is never want- 
ing ; as all the world knows, she is called on to de- 
fend herself just now against the fiercest attacks she 
has perhaps ever suffered — perhaps even beyond what 
she underwent in that fearful persecution, in which her 



1 20 St. Peter s Roman Pontificate, 

enemies directed against her every engine of destruc- 
tion, and in their mad rejoicing recorded the inscrip- 
tion, Christiano nomine deleto. To-day the openly de- 
clared foes of her faith are seated in triumph in her 
stronghold, and strain every nerve to uproot from the 
mind and heart of her children the faith of their 
fathers. Not content with attacking the dogmas she 
teaches, they assail every fact which in any way may 
favor her, no matter how clearly the history of past 
ages may proclaim its truth. An instance of this we 
have had but recently, but a few months ago, when 
an attempt was made to prove that the fact upon 
which the whole jurisdiction of the church is grounded 
never occurred — that St. Peter forsooth never came to 
Rome, and never founded the church there ! With 
what success the champions of this assertion advo- 
cated their cause is known ; and it may still further 
be judged of from the fact that a person who came 
to the discussion, doubting of the fact of St. Peter's 
having been in Rome, left the hall after hearing the 
Catholic speakers, convinced that such an historical 
personage as St. Peter had lived and been in Rome, 
and he recorded his belief in one of the leading jour- 
nals of Italy not favorable to the Catholic cause. 

It may be said to be a strange phenomenon that a 
fact of history so notorious, and for which so great an 
amount of proof exists, which has at its command 
every fount of human certitude, as that of the coming 
of St. Peter to Rome, ever should have been called in 
question. But what will not party spirit attempt ? It 
is not the first time, nor will it be the last, that par- 
tisans will seek to rid themselves of troublesome facts 



St. Peter s Roman Pontificate. 1 2 1 

by downright denial of them. This spirit, however, is 
a dangerous one, and especially unbecoming the sin- 
cere student of history. We know what Bacon has 
said about the idola, and it is incumbent on every 
one who is searching after historic truth to lay aside 
prejudice or even the desire that facts may favor him. 
He must look at them merely as they are, take them 
on their proof, without striving to lessen them or give 
them other proportions than are inherent in them. If 
the scope of all research is to find out the truth, it is 
our duty to seek it only, and not mar its beauty by 
adding to or detracting from it. In the present case 
the remark is highly applicable. Catholics have noth- 
ing to fear in examining the historic proofs on which 
the coming of St. Peter to Rome rests ; while those 
who differ from them, in so far as they love truth, 
should be equally glad to look well into the claims to 
truth, whieh this same fact puts forward. We propose 
to go briefly over the ground. We say briefly, be- 
cause it seems almost presumptuous, since so many 
able pens have dedicated themselves to this task, that 
we should undertake it anew. There seems to us, 
however, a want to be supplied on this subject, some- 
thing succinct and not too learned or too lengthy for 
the ordinary reader, engrossed in pursuits that do not 
allow time for more extended studies. This must be 
our excuse as well as our reason for the present un- 
dertaking. 

In the discussion that took place in Rome on the 
9th and 10th February, 1872, the chief speaker on the 
negative side ended his discourse by saying that, no 
matter what weight of testimony could be brought to 



122 St. Peters Roman Pontificate. 

sustain St. Peter's coming to Rome, the silence of 
Scripture was for him an unanswerable argument ; the 
Scripture should have spoken of the fact had it ex- 
isted ; it said nothing about it, therefore it had never 
existed. Were it not that the subject is too serious 
for such quotations, we should say with Gratiano, 
" We thank thee for teaching us that word ! " This 
was the feeling that came over us as we heard the 
expression from the lips of the speaker, and now, after 
so much has been written, we have it still. It is 
needless to say that such an expression betrays anxiety 
with regard to positive argument, if not a suspicion 
of weakness in one's own cause. We shall endeavor 
to show that there was reason both for this suspicion 
and this anxiety. 

And, first, the opinion which is least probable con- 
cerning the death of St. Peter satisfactorily accounts 
for the silence of the Acts and of the Epistle to the 
Romans, the portions of Scripture on which our adver- 
saries lay most stress in this matter. According to 
this opinion, St. Peter was martyred in Rome, Nerone 
et Vetere Consutibus, i. e. t according to the Bucherian 
Catalogue, in the second year of Nero, the year 54 of 
the Christian era, this leaving St. Peter twenty- five 
years of pontificate, from the year 29 to the year 54. 
St. Linus succeeded him, and ruled the church twelve 
years, dying after St. Paul, who was put to death 
before Nero went into Greece. St. Peter was there- 
fore, according to this chronology, dead before St. Paul 
reached Rome. It is not strange, then, the Acts does 
not speak of his being there. As for the Epistle to 
the Romans, if it was written in the year 53, or two 



St. Peters Roman Pontificate. 123 

years before St. Paul came to Rome according to 
Eusebius, the reasons we adduce further on will ex- 
plain the silence with regard to St. Peter. If, as the 
ordinary opinion has it, the Epistle was written from 
Corinth, in the year 58, St. Peter being already four 
years dead, the omission of his name is easily ac- 
counted for. 

We say, secondly, that in the belief that St. Peter 
and St. Paul died at the same time in Rome, sufficient 
reason can be found for the silence both of the Acts 
and of the Epistle to the Romans. 

We beg particular attention to what we are going 
to say. Those portions of Scripture do not prove by 
their silence that St. Peter never came fo Rome, first, 
because the Acts and the Epistle to the Romans are 
not adequate witnesses in the case ; secondly, because 
neither the Acts nor the Epistle to the Romans was 
called on by circumstances to allude to St. Peter's being 
in Rome. 

And, first, the Acts and Epistle to the Romans are 
not adequate witnesses that St. Peter never came to 
Rome. We call attention to the fact that the Epistle 
to the Romans was written two years before St. Paul 
came to Rome. What therefore we are going to say 
under this first head regarding the Acts applies with 
greater force to the Epistle to the Romans. We shall 
then confine our remarks wholly to the Acts in this 
connection. We say, then, that, in order that the Acts 
should be received as an adequate witness, it should 
cover the whole period from the time St. Peter first 
left Judaea to that of his death as fixed by received 
historical data, for we cannot arbitrarily determine the 



124 St. Peters Roman Pontificate. 



period of his death. Now, it is well known that his- 
tory indicates the date of St. Peter's death as that of 
St Paul's. They are represented as dying on the same 
day and in the same year, one by the sword, the other 
on the cross ; such are the words of the Roman Mar- 
tyrology. This being so, we call attention to the fact 
that the chief disputant on the negative side of the 
question fixed on the year 61, from the Fasti Consul- 
ar es — atti cousolari, as that in which St. Paul came to 
Rome, this being the year in which Portius Festus 
went to take possession of his province.* The Acts 
tells us that after St. Paul came to Rome he dwelt for 
two years in his own hired house. Here the narration 
ceases, leaving" Paul alive and in the year 63 of the 
Christian era. From that time to his death, according 
to historical data, occurs a period, according to different 
computations, of from two to four years. About this 
period of time no mention is made in the Acts for the 
simple reason that it is not embraced there ; the narra- 
tive breaks off just as it begins. What was to prevent 
St. Peter's coming to Rome during this period of from 
two to four years? If he had, the Acts could have 
said nothing about it, nor could it if he had not. The 
conclusion is simple, the Acts, and, a fortiori, the Epistle 
to the Romans, written prior to it, are no competent 
or adequate witnesses to prove St. Peter never came to 
Rome, nor died there. 

* How such information could have been had from the Fasti Con- 
sulares is difficult to say; the suppression was probably a lapsus 
memories for Josephus Flavius. The date of St. Paul's coming to Rome 
is too uncertain to be fixed at 61, yet we accept this year on the author- 
ity of those who put it forward in the discussion. 



St. Peters Roman Pontificate. 125 



We come to the second head : neither the Acts nor 
the Epistle to the Romans was called on to mention 
the fact of St. Peter's being in Rome. With regard to 
the Acts, any one who will carefully read it will see 
that St. Luke narrates the acts of St. Paul. It was 
necessary to begin with some account of the com- 
mencement of the church to show St. Paul's connec- 
tion with it. . This St. Luke does, speaking of the 
descent of the Holy Ghost, of the instantaneous and 
marvelous results of the preaching of St. Peter, of his 
admission of the Gentiles after the vision of the cloth 
containing all manner of animals, and then passes on 
to speak of St. Paul, of his persecution of the church, 
of the martyrdom of St. Stephen, of the wonderful con- 
version of St. Paul. Here St. Paul is brought into 
contact with St. Peter ; but after the Council of Jeru- 
salem, when St. Paul sets out to evangelize the heathen, 
St. Peter is no more heard of, not even when St. Paul 
returns to Jerusalem, as narrated in chapter xxi. Was 
he dead ? Had this been so ere St. Paul left Judaea, 
from his intimate contact with St. Peter, it is probable 
St. Luke would have mentioned a fact so important as 
the death of the first of the apostles. He was not 
dead. He and the other apostles no longer appear in 
the narration of St. Luke, if we except St. James, 
Bishop of Jerusalem, whom St. Paul saw (chapter xxi.), 
because St. Luke did not propose to give a complete 
history of the church at that time, or of the apostles, 
but only of St. Paul and his acts. The Acts are con- 
tained in twenty-eight chapters. In chapter vii., v. 57, 
Saul the persecutor is spoken of for the first time ; in 
the next four chapters he is frequently mentioned. In 



126 .57. Peters Roman Pontificate 



the xv., St. Peter is mentioned for the last time; and 
from this to the xxviii. St. Paul is the theme of the 
inspired writer. In the 15th verse of chapter xxviii. 
the Christians go out to meet Paul at Forum Appii, 
and in verse 16 he is in Rome a prisoner; verse 7 
shows him to us calling together not the Christians, 
but the chief men of the Jews, to explain that he has 
not appealed to Caesar because he had anything 
against his people. After these words, at verse 21, 
the Jews reply to him, and he instructs or upbraids 
them as far as verse 29, which represents the Jews 
going away incredulous. Verse 30 says: "He remained 
two years in his own hired house, and received all 
who came unto him; 31, Preaching the kingdom of 
God, and teaching with all confidence, and without 
prohibition, the things that are of the Lord Jesus 
Christ." Here the Acts ends. Does there seem to 
the reader any place in these two verses for a mention 
of Peter ? Ought the inspired writer to have added 
more to his account ? It seems to us not, for the end 
he had in view was gained. He had been a companion 
of St. Paul, he had told those who knew it not what 
had happened in their travels, and now St. Paul was 
in Rome, and dwelling there, in the centre of the world, 
he did not deem it needful to say any more, otherwise 
he would have told us some of the actions of St. Paul, 
for wonders and conversions he certainly wrought in 
those two years. But as St. Luke says nothing about 
these, nor about the flourishing Church of Rome to 
which St. Paul two years before had addressed his 
Epistle from Corinth, it is not strange he says nothing 
about St. Peter. 



St. Peters Roman Pontificate. 127 



The silence of St. Paul in regard to St. Peter in his 
Epistle to the Romans, is not only of no avail to our 
adversaries, but the Epistle itself contains matter for 
strong argument that St. Peter was permanently in 
Rome, and in fact founded the church there. 

First, with respect to the silence of St. Paul in regard 
to St. Peter. It is a received canon of criticism that 
the silence of authors does not affect the existence of a 
fact, when that fact is proven from documents of weight ; 
and this all the more when no valid reason can be put 
forward to show the author or authors should have 
mentioned the fact in question. Now, this is precisely 
the case with regard to St. Paul's silence about St. 
Peter. We have documentary and monumental evidence, 
as we shall see hereafter, that St. Peter did come to 
Rome, while there was no practical reason why St. 
Paul should mention St. Peter: — not for the sake of 
commending him, for that was neither becoming, as St. 
Peter was head of the apostolic college, nor necessary, 
as St. Peter's works bore the stamp of divine sanction; 
not for the purpose of asking permission to labor in 
Rome, as the apostles were equal in the ministry, and 
united in a bond of perfect harmony and mutual un- 
derstanding, though with subjection to the centre of 
unity, St. Peter, without, however, the distinctions of the 
various rights and duties afterwards introduced by 
ecclesiastical custom ; not for the purpose of salutation, 
for he could not address St. Peter as head of the 
church in a tone of authoritative teaching; and saluta- 
tions, if, contrary to what is generally held, Peter were 
in Rome at the time the letter was written, could be 
made privately by the messenger who carried the letter, 



128 57. Peters Roman Pontijieate. 



and thus the duty of urbanity or charity, the only one 
that could require express notice of St. Peter, may 
have been fulfilled. In fact, propriety itself required 
this latter mode of salutation, lest it should be said that 
St. Paul, instead of having directly addressed St. Peter, 
had saluted him publicly through those to whom he 
wrote — the Christians of Rome, the spiritual subjects of 
St. Peter. The silence, then, of St. Paul is of no weight 
to prove St. Peter never was in Rome. 

The argument of silence therefore falls to the ground. 

We said the Epistle to the Romans contains matter 
to show St. Peter was in Rome, and founded the church 
there. 

Let us bear in mind who St. Paul was — the Apostle 
of the Gentiles. Why was it he did not go at once to 
the centre of the Gentile world ? Could any more 
potent means have been adopted to spread Chris- 
tianity ? There centred the civilization of the known 
world ; there the Ethiopian met the Scythian, the swarthy 
men from the banks of the Ganges were face to face 
with those who first saw light by the waters of the 
Tagus, and the Numidian horseman and the German 
warrior strolled through the Forum, admiring the 
temples of the gods of Rome. Nowhere was there 
more certainty of success in spreading abroad novelty 
of any kind than in this Babylon, receiving into its 
vast enclosure men of ail the nations over which it 
ruled, and sending them forth again filled with wonder 
at what they saw, and eager to impart to their less 
fortunate countrymen what they had learned in their 
sojourn in the great city. Thither, however, St. Paul 
did not go. and why ? Because some one was there 



St. Peters Roman Pontificate. 129 

already — some one of power and authority ; some one 
whose labors had been crowned with success, and who 
had built up a church, the faith of which at the time 
this epistle was written was known throughout the whole 
world. St. Paul tells us himself he desired to go to 
the Romans to impart to them something of spiritual 
grace to strengthen them, that is, to be comforted in 
them " by that which is mutual — your faith and mine." 
The mode of expression of St. Paul in this place, vv. 1 1 
and 12, is worthy of notice. He says to the Romans 
he longs to see them to strengthen them, and, as if he 
might be misunderstood, he adds immediately, " that is 
to say, that I may be comforted together in you." 
Evidently he speaks here as one who is careful lest he 
seem to usurp the place of another, or assume a right 
of teaching with authority which belonged to another. 
He .would, not have the Romans think he considers 
that the one who rules them is inferior to himself or 
stands in need of his support. In verse 18 he says: 
" I do not wish you to be ignorant, brethren, that I 
have often proposed to come unto you (and I have 
been prevented hitherto) that I may have some fruit 
among you as among other peoples." It is manifest 
here that St. Paul's duties with the Greeks kept him 
from going to Rome, and this, as we said before, 
because, the Romans being already provided with one 
who could teach them, there was not the pressing need 
of him that would make him leave those who had none 
to preach to them. 

What we have said with regard to the tone of the 
first chapter of the Epistle is confirmed by the words 
of the apostle in chapter xv. 19-26. Here St. Paul 



130 St. Peters Roman Pontificate. 



says why he had not gone to Rome — because he was 
preaching to those who had no one to preach to them. 
Had the Romans had no apostle preaching to them, 
this would not have been a reason to put forward, 
because the superiority of an apostle over any other 
preacher of the word was such as to do away with 
the necessity of any comparison, and to make all 
desirous in an eminent degree of seeing and hearing 
the chosen man, the sound of whose voice was to be 
heard throughout the whole w r orld. St. Paul then con- 
tinues : " When I shall begin to take my journey into 
Spain, I hope that as I pass, I shall see you, and be 
brought on my way thither by you, if first, in part, I 
shall have enjoyed you." From this it results, first, 
that St. Paul had no intention of remaining in Rome ; 
and. secondly, that what he desired was to enjoy, in 
meeting the Romans, the consolation of seeing their 
faith, and of sharing with them the spiritual gifts he 
himself had received, which should serve to make them 
yet more steadfast in their fidelity to the Gospel, pre- 
cisely as, to use an example, the preaching of the 
same doctrine they have heard from their own bishop, 
by a bishop who is his guest, strengthens the faithful 
in their religious belief. 

The fact, then, stands that a flourishing church ex- 
isted in Rome at the time St. Paul wrote his Epistle, 
and this is still further shown by the salutations in the 
last chapter. Who founded it ? History is silent re- 
garding any one but St. Peter. As Alexandria claims 
St. Peter and St. Mark ; as Ephesus, St. John ; as 
innumerable other cities and countries their respective 
apostles, so does Rome claim St. Peter as its first 



67. Peter s Roman Pontificate. 1 3 1 

evangelizer. It would be absurd to say that all these 
other cities and nations could retain the memory of 
him who first preached to them the word of God, and 
Rome — the greatest of all, where so notorious a fact as 
the preaching of Jesus Christ could not pass by unno- 
ticed, especially when its effects were so luminously 
conspicuous as St. Paul tells us they were— this Rome 
should alone be ungratefully forgetful of her best bene- 
factor. The thing is absurd on the face of it. But 
history is silent about any other founder except St. 
Peter; therefore we are justified in concluding that 
St. Peter, and St. Peter alone, was the original founder 
of the Church of Rome, and that Rome is right in 
holding her tradition that such was the fact. 

This tradition of St. Peter's having been in Rome, 
having founded the church there, and having died 
there, gives strength to the conclusion which Scripture 
has aided us to form. To any one who is at all con- 
versant with Rome, it must always have appeared a 
very remarkable fact that the discoveries made by the 
zeal of her archaeologists have, as a rule, confirmed the 
traditions existing among the people both with regard 
to localities and facts. It would seem as if Providence, 
in these days of widespread scepticism, were unearth- 
ing the long-hid monuments of the past to put to con- 
fusion those who would fain treat the history of early 
ages as a myth. The monuments stare them in the 
face, while their value is understood by men of sound 
practical sense. This is the reason of the reaction that 
is taking place against the sceptical style of writing 
history which Niebiihr and Dr. Arnold adopted, and 
made to a certain extent fashionable. The words of a 



1 32 St. Peters Roman Pontificate. 



well-informed writer, whose works have been deservedly 
well received — Mr. Dyer — are an excellent reply to 
authors of that stamp, based, as they are, on sound 
sense and the experience of mankind — the safest guides 
we can possibly follow ; for it is folly to think that 
those who have gone before us blindly received every- 
thing that was told them. Whatever may have hap- 
pened with regard to individuals, such certainly never 
was the case with regard to all. As well might we say 
that, because some writers of to-day speak in a spirit 
of scepticism, all writers adopt the same style. Men in 
general never were sceptical, and never will be ; they 
will use their senses and their intellect, and judge of 
things on their merits, and not according to the ex- 
travagant ideas of any one, however brilliant he be. 
Mr. Dyer, though speaking of ancient Roman history, 
makes remarks that are applicable in our case. He 
says, in the Introduction to the History of the City of 
Rome, p. xvi. : "It would, of course, be impossible to 
discuss in the compass of this Introduction the general 
question of the credibility of early Roman history. 
We can only state the reasons which have led us to 
doubt a few of the conclusions of modern critics about 
some of the more prominent facts of that history, and 
about the existence or the value of the sources on 
which it professes to be founded. If it can be shown 
that the attempts to eliminate or to depreciate some of 
these sources can hardly be regarded as successful, and 
that the general spirit of modern criticism has been 
unreasonably sceptical and unduly captious with respect 
to the principal Roman historian, then the author will 
at least have established what, at all events, may serve 



St. Peters Roman Pontificate. 133 

as an apology for the course he has pursued." And at 
page lxii. : " There is little motive to falsify the origin 
and dates of public buildings ; and, indeed, their falsifica- 
tion would be much more difficult than that of events 
transmitted by oral tradition, or even recorded in writing. 
In fact, we consider the remains of some of the monu- 
ments of the Regal and Republican periods to be the 
best proofs of the fundamental truth of early Roman 
history." If this author could justly speak in this manner 
of a period regarding which there is certainly not a little 
obscurity, what are we to say when we are speaking of so 
well-known an epoch as that of the Roman Empire under 
Claudius and Nero, and of a fact so luminous as that of 
the foundation of Christianity in the capital of the world ? 
The certainty of the traditions concerning this fact un- 
doubtedly acquires a strength proportionally greater, and 
this all the more because we have the monuments around 
which these traditions centre, and the existence of these 
monuments in the second century is attested by the Ro- 
man priest Caius writing against Proclus, apud Eusebium, 
Hist. Eccl., c. xxv.: " I can," he writes, " show you the 
trophies (tropaea) of the apostles. For, whether you go 
to the Vatican or to the Ostian Way, the trophies of 
those who founded the church will present themselves to 
your view." These monuments are the place of imprison- 
ment of St. Peter, the place of his crucifixion, that of the 
martyrdom of St. Paul, the place of their burial, that in 
which their remains were deposited for a time, and their 
final resting-place, over which the grandest temple of the 
earth rises in its majesty — a witness of the belief of all 
ages 

The tradition of St. Peter having founded the church in 



134 Peters Roman Pontificate. 



Rome receives additional force from the fact that but a 
short period elapsed before writers whose genuine works 
have come down to us recorded them, and thus trans- 
mitted them to us. Not to speak of St. Clement of 
Rome, of St. Ignatius of Antioch, of Papias, we take the 
words of St. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, who was martyred 
in the year 202 of the Christian era. We omit speaking 
of the other fathers, not because we consider their testi- 
mony without great value, for it is impossible, in our 
judgment, for any one who takes up their works with an 
unprejudiced mind, and reads them in connection with 
later and more precise writers on this subject, not to feel 
that they refer to a matter so universally and thoroughly 
known as not to need any further dwelling on than would 
a fact well known to a correspondent, demand details 
from the person who writes him the letter. St. Irenaeus, 
we said, died in the year 202. He had been for a long 
time Bishop of Lyons, whence he wrote to St. Victor, 
pope, on the subject of the controversy regarding the 
celebration of Easter, dissuading him from harsh measures 
with respect to the Christians of the East. St. Victor 
was pope from the year 193 to 202, and succeeded 
Eleutherius, who became pope in the year 177. To this 
latter Irenaeus was sent by the clergy of Lyons in the 
case of the Montanist heresy, he having been received 
and ordained priest of the diocese of Lyons by the 
Bishop Photinus, and it was during the pontificate of the 
same pope that he wrote his celebrated work against 
heresies. He was at this time not a young man, and we 
shall not be wide of the mark if we put his birth some 
years before the middle of the second century, and this 
all the more because he himself in the above-mentioned 



St. Peters Roman Pontificate. 135 



book speaks of his early studies as gone by. According 
to the best authorities, St. John the Apostle was ninety 
years old when he was thrown into the caldron of boiling 
oil, under Domitian, in Rome. He lived several years 
longer at Patmos, and at Ephesus, where he died in the 
year 101, during the reign of Trajan. We have thus a 
period of from thirty to forty years between the death of 
St. John — the witness of what SS. Peter and Paul did, 
and who was fully acquainted with all that had occurred 
at Rome — and Irenaeus. Independent of the means of 
information this proximity to the apostles gave him, both 
because in his youth he must have known many who had 
in their own youth seen and heard St. Peter, and because 
he had himself visited Rome, the interval between him 
and St. John is filled up by the link that unites them in 
an unbroken tradition, by the celebrated martyr and 
Bishop of Smyrna, St. Polycarp, the disciple of St. John 
and the master of St. Irenaeus. We ask the reader to 
say, in all candor, whether this link be not all that can be 
desired to secure belief in the testimony handed down 
through it, from the apostles, especially with regard to 
such a thing as the chief theatre of the life, labors, and 
death of the head of the apostolic college. Anticipating 
a favorable answer, we proceed to give the words of St. 
Irenaeus — of undoubted authenticity. In his work, Contra 
Hcereses, 1. iii. c. L, he writes : " Matthew among the 
Hebrews composed his Gospel in their tongue, while 
Peter and Paul were evangelizing at Rome and founding 
the church. After their decease, Mark, the disciple and 
interpreter of Peter, committed to writing what had been 
preached by Peter." In the same book, c. iii. § 3, St. 
Irenaeus says : " But since it is too long to enumerate in 



136 St. Peters Roman Pontificate. 



a volume of this kind the successions of all the churches, 
pointing to the tradition of the greatest, most ancient and 
universally known, founded and constituted at Rome, by 
the two most glorious Apostles Peter and Paul, to that 
which it has from the apostles, and to the faith an- 
nounced to men, through the succession of bishops 
coming down to our time, we put to confusion all 
who in any manner, by their own self-will, or through 
empty glory, or through blindness, or from malice, 
gather otherwise than they should. For to this 
church, by reason of its more powerful headship (princi- 
palitatem), it behooves every church to come, that is, 
those who are faithful everywhere, in which (in qua) has 
always been preserved by men of every region the tra- 
dition which is from the apostles." He goes on to say : 
" The holy apostles, founding and building up the church, 
gave to Linus the episcopate of administration of the 
church. Paul makes mention of this Linus in his letters 
to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus ; after him, 
in the third place from the apostles, Clement (who also 
saw the apostles, and conferred with them) obtained the 
episcopate, while he yet had the preaching of the 
apostles sounding in his ears and tradition before his 
eyes ; not he alone, for there were many then living who 
had been taught by the apostles. Under this Clement, 
therefore, a not trifling dissension having arisen among 
the brethren who were at Corinth, the church which is at 
Rome wrote a very strong letter, etc. . . . To this 
Clement succeeded Evaristus, and to Evaristus Alex- 
ander, and afterwards the sixth from the apostles was 
Sixtus, and after him Telesphorus, who also gloriously 
suffered martyrdom ; and then Hyginus, next Pius, after 



St. Peter's Roman Pontificate. 



137 



whom Anicetus. When Soter had succeeded Anicetus, 
now Eleutherius has the episcopate in the twelfth place 
from the apostles. By this order and succession, that 
tradition which is from the apostles in the church, and 
the heralding of the truth, have come down to us. 
And this is a most full showing that one and the 
same is the life-giving faith which from the time of the 
apostles down to the present has been preserved and 
delivered in truth. And Polycarp, not only taught by 
the apostles, and conversing with many of those who 
saw our Lord, but also constituted by the apostles 
bishop in Asia, in the church which is at Smyrna, 
whom we also sazv in our early youth, taught always 
the things he had learned from the apostles, which also 
he delivered to the church, and which are alone true. 
To these things all the churches, which are in Asia, 
and those who up to to-day have succeeded to Poly- 
carp bear witness." And in his letter to Florinus St. 
Irenaeus says more explicitly that he was a disciple of 
Polycarp, that he had a most vivid recollection of his 
master, of his ways and words, which he cherished 
more in his heart even than in his memory. * Euse- 
bius, in the Chronicon, says that Polycarp was mar- 
tyred in the year 169, the seventh of Lucius Verus. 

Nothing clearer, more explicit, or of greater value 
than a tradition with such links as St. John the Evan- 
gelist, St. Polycarp, and St. Irenaeus could be desired 
to establish beyond a doubt that St. Peter came to 
Rome and founded the church there. 

This fact having been shown to rest on a solid basis, 

* See Op. S. Irencei, Ed. Cong. S. Mauri, Ven. an. 1734. 



158 St. Peters Roman Pontificate. 



we have now to say a word with regard to the time 
at which St. Peter came to Rome. On this point there 
is a difference of opinion ; but this very difference of 
opinion as regards the epoch is a new proof of the fact 
The most probable opinion, that which seems to have 
found most favor, fixes it at the year 42 of the Chris- 
tian era. the second year of Claudius. This is what 
St. Jerome, following Eusebius. records. The learned 
Jesuit Zaccaria puts it at the year 41, in the month of 
April, the 25 th of which was kept as a holyday, in the 
time of St. Leo the Great, in honor of St. Peter. This 
writer bears witness to the very remarkable unanimity 
among the fathers with respect to the twenty-five 
years' duration of the pontificate of St. Peter in Rome, 
which according to St. Jerome would fix the date of 
his death as the fourteenth year of Xero, the 67th of 
the present era. The words of St. Jerome are : " Simon 
Peter went to Rome to overthrow Simon Magus, and 
had there his sacerdotal chair for twenty-five years, 
up to the last year of Xero, that is, the fourteenth ; 
by whom also he was crowned with martyrdom by 
being affixed to the cross." * St. Jerome, we know, 
was well versed in the history of the church, had dwelt 
for a long time at Rome, and may consequently be 
presumed to have been excellently well informed with 
regard to the general belief and tradition of the peo- 
ple of Rome. The manner of the death of both apos- 
tles is mentioned by Tertullian. in his book De Prcz- 
scriptionibus, c. 126, where, after bidding those he 
addresses have recourse to the apostolic churches, he 



* De Viris Illustribus, c. i. 



St Peters Roman Pontificate. 139 



says: "If you be near to Italy, you have Rome, 
whence also we have authority. How happy is this 
church, for which the apostles poured forth all their 
doctrine with their blood, where Peter equals his 
Lord's Passion, where Paul is crowned with the end of 
John (the Baptist), where the Apostle John, after suf- 
fering no harm from his immersion in the fiery oil, is 
banished to an island." Origen, too, says: "Peter is 
thought to have preached to the Jews throughout 
Pontus, Galatia, Bythinia, Cappadocia, and Asia ; who, 
when he came to Rome, was finally affixed to the cross 
with his head down."* 

Before concluding what we have undertaken to say 
on the subject of St. Peter's coming to Rome, we wish 
to notice the objection against this fact, and the dura- 
tion of his pontificate, which must naturally appear to 
those not well acquainted with antiquity, one of not a 
little strength. How could St. Peter hold the primacy 
at Rome, when the Acts represents him continually 
as in Judaea, among those of his nation to whom he 
had, as St. Paul says, a peculiar mission, the apostle- 
ship of circumcision ? We reply, first : that the apos- 
tleship of St. Peter to the Jews did not exclude his 
labors with the Gentiles ; in fact, we know from the 
Acts that St. Peter had a vision which led him to work 
for the latter, and that vision was immediately fol- 
lowed by the admission, by St. Peter himself, of the 
centurion Cornelius. Moreover, it is well known that 
there were Jews dispersed throughout the world, to 
whom St. Peter is said to have gone, as we have 



* Ap. Eusebiutn, H. E. lib. iii. c. i. 



140 St. Peters Roman Pontificate. 

shown — in Pontus and the other countries of Asia 
Minor; and also in Rome they were numerous. Duty 
therefore, both to the Jew and Gentile, could and did 
lead St Peter to Rome. 

We say, seconc 
of St Peter havin 
from their very c 
and the sound of 
As is narrated of 
them ; and, burn 
upon them on th 
everywhere kindli 
within themselves, 
travel, especially 
do better than to 
Fabiani in his Discussion with those who impugned 
the coming of St. Peter to Rome. In the authentic 

many days were required for a journey from Csesarea 
to Rome ? Little more than fifteen days. 
Lately very learned men among Protestants, and at the 
same time men thoroughly skilled in what regards the 
seafaring art, Smith and Penrose, have calculated from 
the very voyage of St Paul, and from the narrations in 
the Acts, the time that vessels took to come from 
Csesarea to Rome. They went at the rate of seven 
knots an hour, so that it took one hundred and seventy- 
seven hours, or seven days and a third, to come from 
Csesarea to Pozzuoli - and Pliny himself assures us that 



difficulty in the fact 




their voice was heard in every land. 



them, they divided the nations among 
ig with the fire of zeal sent down 
: day of Pentecost, they went about, 
ig in others the flame that burned 
As for the difficulties or facilities of 
a the case of St. Peter, we cannot 
cite the words of the learned Canon 



St. Peters Roman Pontificate. 141 



Jerusalem, you know, differ but little in distance to 
Rome, from Alexandria in Egypt. The journey from 
Messina and Pozzuoli to Rome was made in about 
two or three days, so that the whole time required to 
go from Rome to Jerusalem was not more than half a 
month." It is easy then, to understand how St. Peter 
could be often in Judaea, though he had fixed his per- 
manent residence in Rome. 

To sum up what we have been saying, no argument 
can be had from the silence of Scripture to prove St. 
Peter never came to Rome, because the Acts and 
Epistle to the Romans do not cover the whole epoch 
of St. Peter's apostleship. Moreover, the silence ot 
Scripture does not prove that St. Peter did not rule 
the Church of Rome twenty-five years, because, as we 
have shown, there was no reason why either the Acts 
or the Epistle to the Romans should speak of St. 
Peter's going to Rome and being there. What we 
have here asserted is all the more true because we 
have positive testimony not only with regard to St. 
Peter's coming to Rome, but also respecting the date 
of his coming, the period of his ruling the church 
there, the time and the manner of his death there, 
and because we have the monuments recording the 
memory of the Apostles Peter and Paul, the trophies 
of the apostles, as Caius calls them, tropcea apostolorum, 
which exist to this day, surrounded by the marks of 
veneration and the pious traditions of the people of 
Rome. Against all these proofs difficulties of history 
and chronology are of no avail ; for, in the first place, 
the very difficulties and discussions only serve to con- 
firm the fact, especially since these difficulties and 



142 St. Peter s Roman Pontificate. 



discussions have lasted for fifteen centuries without bring- 
ing about the rejection of the main fact ; in the next 
place, we know there are many well-established facts 
regarding which there exist difficulties to clear up, and 
this nowhere more than in past history. When we 
have proved by one solid, unanswerable argument a 
fact, we should not trouble ourselves much regarding 
what may be brought against it. The elucidation of 
knotty points may delight us and reward the labors of 
the erudite; for common practical use the matter is 
settled ; and any one who rises up against it must 
not wonder if he be looked on as either not well 
informed, or, to say the least, eccentric. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



VIII. 



COLLEGE EDUCATION. 



(The Catholic World, September, 1877.) 



HE schools of the country have held their days of 



I exhibition or of graduation, the young men are 
enjoying their holidays, and the teachers are preparing 
themselves for a new year of work. It would seem to 
be a favorable moment to say a word about the ques- 
tion that more or less occupies all who think seriously 
of the future — education. This word, so often used, 
conveys different ideas, according to the person who 
speaks. Its etymology undoubtedly gives it a certain 
definite meaning : educo, erudiri are two words that 
signify the bringing forth from a negative state to a 
positive one — from ignorance and rudeness to knowl- 
edge and culture. But this general idea does not 
cover the whole matter. We have to consider the end 
to which this process is directed in order to have an 
adequate idea of what it should be. Now, this end we 
shall have clearly before us if we call to mind the end 
for which man is here on earth. Christians all acknowl- 
edge and teach that man is here to know, love and 
serve God and save his soul. These two, therefore — 
redemption from ignorance and a rude state, and the 
end for which man is here — give us the right idea of 




144 



College Education. 



what education ought to be. The appreciation of both 
will enable us to avoid two fatal obstacles — presump- 
tion and error. The proper state of mind of any one 
beginning a course of education is the recognition of 
his want of knowledge. There is nothing so hurtful as 
a spirit of pride; for this blinds the mind, makes one 
overweeningly confident of his powers, attached to his own 
opinions, and loath to receive instruction. We have 
heard in our day young people discussing the question 
whether a man were not able to work out the most 
difficult problems of human science of himself ; whether 
he absolutely stood in need of the guidance of others ; 
and whether there were any branch of human knowledge 
or achievement of past times any one. might not be able 
to attain to or accomplish, provided he turned his atten- 
tion to it, and circumstances were favorable. And when 
a young man had succeeded in mastering a certain 
amount of learning or science, we have been witnesses of 
the very remarkable phenomenon of seeing him set him- 
self up as one whose opinion should cut short every 
discussion, and form the law of belief or action for those 
around him. Any one having had any experience of 
truly learned men, who even may not have been models 
of virtue, must have been struck at the humility of mind 
they give proof of. They, more than others, appreciate 
how little they know of what it is possible to know ; they 
see the vast field of knowledge of which they individually 
can cultivate but a part, and common sense keeps them 
from thinking themselves possessed even of all that can 
be known of what they are actually engaged in. They 
agree in spirit with the celebrated master of Plato, whose 
saying is familiar to us : "I know only this : that I know 



College Education. 145 

nothing." The first requisite, therefore, for sound educa- 
tion is a humble state of mind, a disposition to be taught 
and receive the lessons with docility — a disposition not 
only needful in a beginner, but required even more the 
further one advances into the domain of knowledge. 
When one adds to the original and relative ignorance of 
us all the further fact of the ease with which we go 
astray, fall into error — a facility so great as to have given 
rise to the adage in universal use, " Humanum est errare" 
— it is impossible a man of sense should not recognize the 
necessity of keeping down the spirit of pride and self- 
confidence, and confess that, in not having controlled 
himself in this respect, he has given the most complete 
proof of the adage in his own case. We are therefore all 
in the same condition, all in need of learning, and stand 
in want of a teacher to instruct us and lead us in the path 
of truth. What is the truth we are to seek after, who the 
teacher we are to go to, results from the study of the end 
to which education is to be directed. We have seen that 
the end of man is to know, love, and serve God and save 
his soul, and this tells us what education should be. 
Anything that conflicts with this end is to be rejected ; 
whatever aids us in attaining it is to be embraced ; and as 
all truth is in harmony with that end, it follows that 
education can embrace all sciences that are truly such, 
while it must eliminate all error ; for error has a logical 
effect of keeping us from the attainment of that end, 
especially where that error regards the higher branches 
of speculative education. 

Here, then, comes in the most important element in 
the education of man — religion ; religion, that is, to teach 
his head and train his heart. If, as is most certainly the 



146 



College Education. 



fact, man was made for God and for immortal life here- 
after, education that would exclude this element — -religion 
— which regulates the relations of man with God, and 
teaches him how he may gain that everlasting state for 
which he has been created, is wanting most deplorably in 
the one thing needful. Such an education fits a man 
only for matter ; is of the earth earthy. It has no higher 
aim than the objects around him ; it is a guide that does 
not bring into the presence of the King, but takes one no 
further than the domain over which the King's power is 
exercised. However much it may delight the eye with 
grandeur of scenery, proofs of power and of wisdom, it 
has no right or ability to introduce into a close commu- 
nion with the Sovereign, the source of all it beholds. 
It is simply an unworthy servant banished forever from 
the face of his Master. This kind of education, which we 
shall style secular, professedly excludes all religious con- 
trol of any kind whatsoever, and it consequently relies 
only on reason and scientific examination. Now,«»reason 
has been found wanting. In the brightest examples of 
pagan times, familiar to students of history, are to be 
found not only actions nature itself condemns, but prin- 
ciples laid down by them subversive of natural society 
and of all Christian virtue — pantheism and immorality. 
And we owe it to Christianity that we have been rescued 
from the social life in which such principles prevailed 
and were in practice. Any one nowadays who knows 
something of men will bear witness to the fact that both 
the one and the other — pantheism and immorality — are 
on the increase and show themselves publicly in the 
speech of the men and women of to-day. This can be 
owing only to one cause — the divorce of religion from 



College Education. 



147 



education. And because this is so, because secular 
education does not lead us to God, but takes us from 
Him, a dividing line must be drawn between religious 
education and secular education ; an insuperable barrier 
exists between them, which must and ought to keep all 
that believe in revelation on the side of a training under 
the eye of religion. And if this be the case with regard 
to all who profess belief in Christ, how much truer is it 
with reference to those who have given their names to 
the Catholic Church and look to her infallible voice tor 
their guidance ! In saying this we do not wish to speak 
disparagingly of the learning, the ability, or the zeal of 
those engaged in the cause of education who are not with 
us. We respect all those who are striving to increase 
the treasure of human knowledge or dispense it to their 
fellow- men. We join hands with all who are earnest in 
their study of true science, and rejoice in their success. 
We have no right to question their sincerity. But 
between their efforts and success in discovery, or in 
acquiring and imparting learning, and the way in which 
they educate, there is a difference most vital and essential. 
The one investigates the works of the Creator, while the 
other leads men practically, where it does not absolutely 
tell them as much, to ignore the Creator himself. Godless 
science can only fill a man with himself, while it offers 
no guarantee for the preservation of his morals and the 
attainment of his last end. 

On the other hand, religion goes before the education 
which is allied with her. With her torch of faith she 
illumes the darkness of men's minds. She shows them 
how much more beautiful is the Author of all the 
beautiful things they contemplate than are the objects 



i 4 3 



College Education. 



themselves. She makes them behold in him the original 
essential beauty of which the universe is only a faint 
participation, and yearn for the possession of that Beauty 
and sovereign Good she tells them is within their reach ; 
and she shows them how, under her direction, they may 
not be carried away by transient allurements, by what 
the}' see around them, but attain to an indissoluble union 
with that Beauty and sovereign Good — with God himself. 

But it may be said religion has nothing to do with 
natural science ; it cramps man's mind, fetters his intel- 
lect, stops his investigation. It will do well enough in 
its sphere, but its action is hurtful to scientific pursuits. 

Is this true? It is not true; and we can refute the 
charge by principle and by fact 

All that exists belongs to God. All science, all 
truth comes from ■ Him, the great First Cause, from 
whom all things proceed, in whom there can be no 
contradiction. His works, therefore, cannot contradict 
Him nor contradict each other. Natural truth and 
revealed truth must, then, be in harmony, and we do 
not fear a conflict between them. The Catholic student 
of science is as fearless an investigator as is his 
rationalist confrere • but the former will not rashly give 
himself up to speculations the others further experience 
will oblige him to retract. The facts of science will 
never be in opposition to revelation, though the inter- 
pretation of scientific men may be, to their discomfiture 
later on. Even if the teacher of revelation, the church, 
should by any possibility, as is asserted in the case of 
Galileo, fail in a disciplinary decree with regard to 
scientific research, such decrees not being infallible 
utterances of the Holy See, there remains always the 



College Education. 



149 



remedy of a reversal when the incontestable proof of 
the contrary, such as he did not bring forward, shall 
be produced. So spoke Cardinal Bellarmine, one of 
Galileo's judges. Though we may safely say that those 
in charge of the interests of the church do well in being 
exceedingly careful how they interfere with scientific 
investigation, it nevertheless may become necessary at 
times to curb the license of those who undertake to 
interpret the truths of revelation according to their 
ideas or appreciation of science. How many scientific 
theories fall to pieces every day ! And is it not reason- 
able that those who believe in a revelation should not 
be left at the mercy of every clever scientific man who 
is pleased to have a tilt against it ? Let any scientific 
truth be fully proved, and the Catholic Church will be 
the first to applaud, for it redounds to the glory of 
her Head. 

We need not, however, confine ourselves to this 
negative way of advocating the cause of revelation as 
friendly to science, for there is no dearth of positive 
proof of the fact. 

Revelation is positively of advantage to the study of 
science. It is clear that any one who keeps me, when 
on a journey, from going out of my way saves me an 
amount of time and trouble. Instead of wandering in 
the woods and by-paths, I am enabled to keep the 
highway and so reach sooner my destination. This is 
one of the important services revelation renders science. 
It tells us : Don't direct your attention hither or thither ; 
for you will find out you are wrong, after losing precious 
time and making yourself a laughing-stock. Don't go 
in search of the " missing link," for you won't find it. 



College Education. 



Don't divide the unity of the human race, for it is one 
— of one man and one woman. Don't grovel with the 
materialists ; for man has a spirit, and he is destined 
for a better life hereafter. Such like warnings we have 
from revelation, and, instead of going astray with 
evolutionists and so-called philosophers, we employ our 
time and talents on points that are serious and practical 
in science and nature ; and Heaven knows there are 
plenty of these to engage us. The result is useful 
knowledge that does not undo but builds up society 
and perfects civilization. For this our grateful thanks 
are due revelation, 

Then, again, revelation opens up to us new fields of 
thought. It gives us an insight into what we could 
not otherwise know. It is as if chance discovered to 
us some principle of art or science no one had before 
suspected. Once presented, reason can occupy itself on 
it, explore it as far as possible, make deductions and 
applications. How much human ethics have gained in 
clearness and usefulness by the light of the command 
to love our neighbor, and by the example of the 
Redeemer of man ! How much speculative philosophy 
with regard to personality, responsibility, good and evil, 
and the future life ! The crude theories of pagan 
times excite our compassion nowadays, though we 
honor the ability of their original propounders ; yet 
these same theories we see now broached by those who 
have cast aside revelation, but often with less depth 
and less wisdom than the pagan in whose mind not all 
the light of natural religion was quenched. Xo ! revela- 
tion is the friend of science; science divorced from 
religion, the vaunted glory of to-day, is the enemy of 



College Education. 



progress ; retrogade in all save the energetic talent 
that is lost in its service. 

A few examples will show what revelation or the 
church has done and is doing for the cause of educa- 
tion ; whether it has checked the development of man 
or favored it. 

We will go to the " dark ages," in which those who 
oppose the church as an educator are wont to find 
their cheval de bataille, their bugbear to frighten off 
those inclined to trust her. We say nothing of the 
unfairness of Protestants who wilfully ignore the sad 
state of the Roman world consequent on the barbarian 
invasions of the fifth, sixth, and seventh centuries, and 
the struggles with the Saracens, who penetrated even 
into Italy — a condition of things most inimical to the 
quiet requisite for study ; who pass over the conquest 
of those barbarians and their civilization by the church; 
who pretend to know nothing of what was done by the 
monks to preserve learning in their monasteries, to 
whom the preservation of the classic, philosophic, and 
ascetic works of antiquity and of the early church — the 
Bible among them — is due. We come to the thirteenth 
century. There we see, burning with a light that is 
celestial, a luminary not of the church only but of 
human reason — St. Thomas Aquinas, the Angelic 
Doctor. There was hardly a branch of intellectual 
pursuit of which he was not a master. His works are 
wonderful, and have always been a precious and useful 
legacy in every subsequent age. His great work, the 
Sum of Theology, has remained the text-book of theo- 
logians. In fact, no theologian is master of his subject 
who has not made St. Thomas the object of his constant 



152 



College Education. 



study. Though at times somewhat neglected, we 
may safely say that at present there is an increasing 
appreciation of his works. Certainly this is true of his 
philosophical treatise Contra Gentiles. There is now a 
widespread movement in all civilized nations to return 
to the use of the metaphysical and ethical teachings of 
St. Thomas, and it will be the means of regenerating 
such philosophical studies in this epoch of individual 
self-assertion, ^of ipse dixits, when every man of talent 
who lists puts forth his own hazy speculations as the 
truth, and strives to force down his deductions as the 
ne plus ultra of science. Domenico Soto, at the Coun- 
cil of Trent, defined scholastic theology to be reason 
illumined by faith ; we may, like him, style scholastic 
philosophy reason kept in its right path by the torch 
of faith. In the works of St. Thomas will be found the 
refutation of the pantheism of Spinoza and the pres- 
ent German school, of the materialism of Hobbes and 
Biichner, of the utilitarian ideas of Mill, Spencer, and 
others of the followers of PufTendorf. We shall find, 
too, in his writings the ablest defence of revelation, and 
the sound principles that will enable us to put to flight 
the whole host of mythical theorists of the age. So 
much for theology, metaphysics, and ethics. 

If we wish to speak of the work of the church in 
poetry, science, and literature, we have a monument of 
what she could do, even in the middle ages, in Dante. 
We hardly know which to admire most in this ex- 
traordinary man — his native genius, his extraordinary 
powers of imagination, the beauty of his imagery, the 
remarkable knowledge of theology and philosophy he 
exhibits in his writings, or the beauty of the language 



College Education. 



153 



he created. His culture was due to the church ; his 
inspiration was drawn from revelation; and his science 
he drank in at the great schools established and car- 
ried on by the church in Italy, in France, and in Eng- 
land. So pre-eminent is this writer, philosopher, and 
poet, that even in the nineteenth century our own 
poet whose works are read and justly appreciated 
wherever the English language is spoken — Henry W. 
Longfellow — has deemed it well worthy of his own 
genius to be his translator. Yet Dante is the product 
of the Catholic Church. 

But the fashion to-day is to extol physical science. 
Of a truth, physical science does not hold, and should 
not hold, the first place. If man were only matter, it 
might and should ; but he has a soul, and the spiritual 
and intellectual world is his proper sphere. Scientific 
knowledge is useful for the arts that serve to make 
commerce prosper, and should be sought after ; but to 
make commerce and what pertains to it, and the 
material comforts of man, the main object of his 
thoughts and aims is a monstrous disorder. 

However, even in this sphere of physical science the 
church is not afraid of her competitors. We leave to 
one side old Friar Bacon and other patriarchs of sci- 
ence, and we come to our own day. The church can 
point to Angelo Secchi, one of the first of living 
astronomers and physical scientists, and a member of 
a society that counts among its members men distin- 
guished in every branch of human knowledge— the 
Society of Jesus. So great is the pre-eminence of this 
distinguished savant in his native Italy that, since the 
city of Rome has been in the hands of the present 



154 



College Education. 



rulers, they have left nothing undone to gain him over 
to their side. And it is a pleasure to us to pay this 
public tribute to the noble fidelity he has shown to his 
faith, his church, and his society, giving as he does a 
splendid example of the alliance between the most 
advanced physical science and the Catholic Church. 

As faithful adherents to revelation, though not Cath- 
olics, we may mention the late Prof. Faraday and the 
no less distinguished Dr. Carpenter, who show that 
revelation and science do not war against each other. 

But we need not content ourselves with showing 
that the church is not hostile to human learning. It 
is easy to bring forward facts that put her before the 
world in her true character as the real friend of man, 
the guardian of his dignity, the zealous protectress of 
the truth of his intellect and of the freedom of his will. 
hi medio stat virtus — Virtue avoids extremes. Our 
tendency to go wrong is by doing too much or too 
little, and we need something to keep us from either 
of these two extremes. It is here the church comes in 
to fulfill this friendly and much-needed office. 

There was in the fourth and fifth century an intel- 
lectual movement that attributed more than its due to 
human nature. The Pelagian errors gave to man a 
power he does not possess, and those errors are very 
widely spread in this nineteenth century. They ignore 
the efficacy of grace, or the help the will stands in need 
of to serve God. Grace, according to their most favor- 
able view, was only a light for the intellect. Here was 
an excess ; too much was claimed for human nature. 
Such doctrine is contradicted by Scripture and by the 
fathers. Our Lord tells us : "I am the vine, and you 



College Education. 



155 



are the branches; without me you can do nothing." 
And St. Paul says: "We are not able to think of any- 
thing [conducive to salvation] of ourselves ; but our 
sufficiency is from God." And St. Augustine, against 
those who spoke of some of the precepts as impossi- 
ble, writes : " God does not command what is impos- 
sible ; but commanding (thereby) counsels us to do 
what we can, to ask for aid to do what is beyond our 
power, and aids us that we may be able to do it." 
In this case we have the church curbing human pride 
and keeping the intellect and will within its true 
limits. 

In the sixteenth century there was a movement, re- 
sulting from pride and rebellion, that had its own pun- 
ishment in the degradation to which it reduced man's 
nature. Luther's dogmatic system had, and has — for 
it lives in Protestantism — the effect of so debasing 
human nature as to deny light to the intellect and 
power to the will to do anything that was not sinful ; 
for he held that the will of man is essentially changed, 
so that it depends on who directs it, God or the 
devil; and, besides, whatever it does is sinful, though 
covered by the merits of Jesus Christ, which, like 
Esau's garments, prevent the knowledge or sight of the 
true state of things and the imputation of sin. 

Here was a defect ; human nature was denied some 
of its powers. 

The church fulminated this doctrine, and taught for- 
mally that man's intellect and will, though weakened 
by sin and passion, are not essentially changed, and 
that all man's acts are not sinful. She recognized some- 
thing of his original dignity in man. Hers is the spirit 



156 



College Education. 



of the great St. Leo, whose eloquent words made the 
Christians and Romans of his day remember their ori- 
gin, and the height to which they had been raised by 
the Incarnation. He exclaims : " Remember, O man ! 
thy dignity, and, having been made a partaker of the 
divine nature, return not by degenerate conversation to 
thy former vileness." She bade man remember that 
his nature, never essentially corrupt, had been purified 
by the grace of God, and that " in those that please 
God there is nothing denied." 

Luther's teachings shed a sinister influence far and wide 
that tainted even Catholic universities and affected writers 
who still professed to be in union with the church. 

In the former University of Louvain, Jansenius went so 
far as to say that some of the Gospel precepts were im- 
possible, and that no grace was given to fulfill them. The 
words that were used by St. Augustine to refute the 
Pelagians, were turned against Jansenius, and the voice of 
the church was heard anew vindicating man from the 
necessity of committing sin. Later on came Baius, of 
the same university, teaching also a doctrine of universal 
depravity ; and the sovereign pontiff proclaimed that 
negative infidelity — that is, idolatry in good faith — is not 
a sin ; that consequently those \x\\o have not grace or the 
illumination of faith can do many good actions, though 
such actions have not the merit of those which are made 
available through the merits of Christ. Thus again did 
the church prove herself the friend of human dignity. 

Further on we meet those who, suffering the infection 
of the air caused by the doctrines of universal depravity r 
deny to the intellect the power of discovering the truth 
by itself. The traditionalists wish to trace everything to 



College Education. 



157 



an original revelation ; man has nothing he has not 
received from outside. Even his knowledge of God 
comes from tradition. And this doctrine the church, 
through her supreme teacher, discountenanced. She bade 
them recall to mind the words of the Book of Wisdom 
and of St. Paul, where we are told that God can be known 
from the contemplation of this visible world. 

We will crave indulgence if we go so far as to venture 
the assertion that the doctrines of Malebranche and his 
school had their origin in this same depreciation of the 
powers of the human intellect. It may be said that the 
idea of intuition is a nobler one than that of painful 
analysis and deduction ; that intuition — vision — is the lot 
of the blessed, and therefore a higher state. But this is 
a state above nature, for the blessed ; not a natural state 
in our present condition. Moreover, there are reasons to 
make us believe that Malebranche did not escape the 
infection of the world of thought prevalent in his day — 
the disesteem of human nature ; an infection not, indeed, 
logically connected with the system of Luther. It was, if 
we may be permitted so to speak, a psychological effect 
— a habit of mind being induced, whereby one was led so 
to think. This would appear to be evidenced by his 
doctrine of occasionalism, which made God always acting 
because man could not — a doctrine the authority of the 
church obliged him to modify, for he would thereby have 
made God the author of sin. Though no official con- 
demnation of the theories of Malebranche, regarding the 
primary mode of knowing truth, has ever been given by 
the church, or is at all likely to be given, the deductions 
of certain of his followers have been condemned ; and it 
is well known that the weight of the influence of the 



College Education. 



Holy See has been cast in the scale of the psychological 
theories of St. Thomas, whose principle, clearly laid down, 
is : " Operatio intellectus praeexigit operationem sensus " 
— " The operation of the intellect prerequires the opera- 
tion of sense " — I. 2, quaest. iii. art. 3, resp. And in 
his first part, quaest. xviii. art. 2, he writes : " Intel- 
lectus noster qui proprie est cognoscitivus quidditatis 
rei ut proprii objecti, accipit a sensu : cujus propria 
objecta sunt accidentia exteriora. Et inde est, quod 
ex his quae exterius apparent de re, devenimus ad 
cognoscendam essentiam rei" — " Our intellect, that prop- 
erly takes cognizance of what a thing is (its essence) as 
its proper object, receives of the senses, the proper objects 
of which are external accidents. Hence it is that from 
what appears externally in a thing we come to know its 
essence." Of course sense is to be taken in its widest 
meaning, so as not to exclude the perception of the 
modifications going on in our internal being, which are 
the accidents of our spiritual essence. Man, therefore, 
has no natural revelation, but he arrives at knowledge by 
the essentially inherent powers of his mind —perception, 
abstraction, generalization. God sees by intuition every- 
thing in himself — this is essential in him ; created intel- 
lects see what is, or intellectual truth, the archetype in 
God, reflected from creation as from a mirror. 

From these instances, then, it is evident that the church 
has always been the friend of human nature, asserting 
for it the possession of faculties denied it, protecting it 
from error, and guiding it in the search of truth. She 
is, therefore, worthy of the gratitude of mankind for what 
she has done in the cause of education, as well as of the 
confidence of men as an instructor of youth in the future. 



College Education. 



159 



We come now to a more directly practical part of our 
assumed task, and shall consider it our duty to speak 
plainly, and perhaps in a way to be censured by some ; 
but we do it in what seems to us the interest of our 
people and country. The Rev. Father T. Burke, O.S.D., 
while in this country some years ago, addressing a society 
of young men, told them that Americans could not 
expect to take their position among the civilized nations 
of the world unless they studied, and studied not super- 
ficially but well. For our part, we thank him for this 
word. It is time to put out of our heads that we are 
the most cultivated, civilized, well-informed people of the 
world. We are not. Alongside the generality of the 
educated men of Europe, the generality of the educated 
men of America do not appear to advantage. Who and 
what is to blame for this ? 

In the first place, we blame parents. They ought to 
know better ; they have had experience of the Avorld. 
They are the natural guardians of their offspring, and 
should provide by their experience a remedy for the 
inexperience of youth. Yet they, and especially Cath- 
olic parents, are those who put the greatest obstacles in 
the way of those engaged in teaching. They want their 
boys hurried through school ; they can't see the use of 
Latin, much less of Greek. As for philosophy, a man 
can make a fortune without philosophy ; as if a fortune 
were the only thing worth living for ! If that were the 
case, your California stage-driver who has struck a 
" bonanza " is the type of what a man should be in- 
tellectually. Heaven save the mark ! We have had 
such men say to us : "I assure you, sir, it is a very 
great misfortune my education was neglected ; I have 



i6o 



College Education. 



wealth and don't know how to enjoy it." There are 
numbers of unhappy wealthy Americans traveling in 
Europe whose children are looking forward to brilliant 
futures, but who themselves rush from one place to 
another, tortured by the necessity of having to come in 
contact with educated people and learn daily their own 
inferiority. We have met such people, and, out of sheer 
pity for their unhappy lot, have done what was in our 
power to make them forget for a while their troubles. 

The fact is, no greater boon can a wealthy parent 
bestow upon his child than a thorough, careful educa- 
tion, and every effort should be made to secure such 
education. And one of the first steps to be taken is 
that parents second the efforts of zealous educators in 
our Catholic institutions. These institutions have their 
defects, but those defects can hardly be remedied with- 
out the co-operation of parents. What that co-operation 
should be will be seen further on. 

There are defects in our institutions of education. 
This is our next point. These defects are in the man- 
ner of teaching and in what is taught. 

We acknowledge that there have been great improve- 
ments in the manner of teaching since we were boys ; 
but with all this the want of uniformity, scarcely attain- 
able in this country, will always leave the door open 
to defects in teaching. As a rule, the mind of a boy 
is too much taxed with speculative matter, and his 
memory comparatively neglected. The memory is one 
of the first faculties to show itself active, and it is also 
capable of wonderful development. In the earlier 
education of the child the exercise of the memory 
should predominate ; as little strain as possible should 



College Education. 



161 



be put on the mind yet tender. As the education 
progresses the exercise of the memory should be kept 
up; choice extracts from the best poets and writers 
should alternate with the useful storing in the mind of 
facts and definitions. The preliminary education should 
consist in the learning of languages, which are means 
of acquiring further knowledge by intercourse and 
reading, not by any means the sum total of education. 
We wish our Catholic parents would understand this ; 
for when a boy succeeds in knowing a little French 
and German they seem to think everything done. 
These languages are only the keys to the treasures 
locked up in the writings of other nations. They are 
principally to be acquired by memory ; and, in fact, 
this is the way the most successful and generally used 
method — that of Ollendorf— adopts. There is no reason 
why the boy should not be put at a very early age to 
learning foreign languages. There is, too, one great 
advantage in this : that his work at such languages 
will be lighter and less absorbing when he comes to 
be engaged in scientific study. Again, care should be 
taken not to put into the hands of a child books of an 
abstruse or relatively difficult character; for excessive 
caution against straining the mind of such a scholar 
can scarcely be taken. A great deal of harm is some- 
times done from the too high standard exacted by school 
boards of the various categories of boys. We have 
never ceased to praise the judicious interference of our 
father, who, finding us with an analytical arithmetic put 
into our hands at seven years of age, took it away 
and placed it on the highest shelf of his closet. 

When a boy is well under weigh in the languages — 



l62 



College Education. 



we do not speak of religious education, which we take 
for granted — he may very properly be introduced to 
the study of experimental science and the more difficult 
problems of analytical arithmetic and mathematics. 
But these branches should not be arranged in such a 
way as to compete, as it were, with that much- 
neglected study, so lightly thought of — mental philos- 
ophy. If one visits our different Catholic institutions 
of learning, and examines their system, still more looks 
into the practical working of it, he will find that the 
year of philosophy, much talked of, is employed in a 
most perfunctory manner. We would not be under- 
stood as attributing any culpa theologica to the instruc- 
tors. We consider this state of things owing first to 
parents, and consequently to their children, and in part 
to the want of appreciation of the need of such 
philosophical training on the part of the teachers ; 
though, also, sometimes, to want of competency in the 
teachers themselves, whose previous education has been 
on the old plan. We conceive that too great attention 
and zeal cannot be expended in the correction of these 
defects. Corrected they can be, and they must be. if 
we wish to take and keep our proper standing. We 
cannot have a university for the present, and, therefore, 
it is all important that the one essential thing a 
university can give — a higher mental training — should 
be given to our young Catholic men. They must 
receive this in our colleges ; they will not have it else- 
where. Of the need of it there can be no question. 
The great number of able, educated Europeans who, 
from political causes, have had to leave their native 
country and come to us, and the large number of 



College Education. 



Americans who nowadays study in European univer- 
sities, all of whom, in conversation and through the 
press, retail to us the wildest phases of infidel, meta- 
physical, and social doctrine, is a sufficient argument 
to decide the matter, should any one hesitate. The 
church, to be sure, is our infallible guide, but there are 
many questions she does not treat, or, if she has treated 
them, her decisions can be understood only by careful 
study and explanation in the language of philosophy. 
So far from discouraging the study of philosophy, of 
metaphysics, and of ethics — possibly the more important 
of the two — she encourages us to make a good use of 
this handmaid of theology. It is, therefore, a duty 
incumbent on those in whose hands is placed the 
education of our young men to pay more attention 
than ever to this kind of instruction. We know of 
efforts in some instances that have been made in this 
direction, but which have failed. We are afraid they 
were not very numerous. In some instances a tincture 
of metaphysics was deemed enough ; ethics were wholly 
neglected. How this could be has always been a 
puzzle to us. But it should not be any longer. A 
careful course of metaphysics that would embrace 
particularly the refutation of pantheism and materialism, 
besides establishing thoroughly the existence of God 
and the spirituality and immortality of the soul ; and 
an equally careful course of ethics that would refute the 
utilitarians and socialists of the day, while making clear 
the claims of authority, the nature of law, the origin of 
right in the eternal fitness of things as seen in the 
divine Mind, and such kindred questions, should be the 
object of the most earnest solicitude of the superiors of 



164 



College Education. 



our Catholic colleges. The young students should be 
made to apply their knowledge thus received either by 
short compositions in addition to the repetition of the 
lessons taught ; or, far better still, by academic exer- 
cises in which one student defends in the school-room 
before his teacher and fellow-students a thesis or 
proposition already explained, while one or two others 
object against it all they can think of or learn, and, 
this, too, in strict syllogistic form. Exercises such as 
these would be of the greatest advantage in training 
the mind to the ready use of logic, and to refuting the 
arguments possible to be urged against sound doctrine. 
Nothing better than this would tend to take away the 
reproach so often, and perhaps in some cases most un- 
justly, made against our educational institutions, of 
incompetency for thorough education. Did it depend on 
us to have the recasting of the system of education, we 
should be inclined to add on a year of further study 
as a requisite for graduation, and during the last two 
years of a young man's course we would employ him 
entirely in the study of metaphysics and ethics, in- 
cluding the principles of political economy, of the 
philosophy of history — in which the great questions of 
history, as far as possible, might be reviewed — and in 
the further polish of his literary English training. The 
philosophy of history is most important, for it is a 
powerful teacher. History is not to be studied as a 
bare narrative of facts ; the facts have a language of 
their own which needs an interpreter. The polish of 
literary education is of great necessity, as it is the one 
thing those educated in the non- Catholic colleges may 
be said to excel us in. We do not dwell much on 



College Education. 



165 



scientific education, because that is really of secondary 
importance, and it is impossible to give boys more than 
an elementary training in this branch, which may serve 
as a groundwork for further pursuit of it, if one is 
destined to turn his attention in that direction. To 
enable the superiors of our colleges to carry out such 
a plan would depend upon the parents of young 
students having the fortitude to oblige their sons to 
remain the requisite time and make a diligent use of 
their opportunities.- Herein lies their co-operation in 
the great work of the future education of the Catholic 
young men of America ; and our word for it, if they 
follow this counsel, they will never have cause to 
repent. They will give us, too, far abler champions of 
truth than our young men have shown themselves to 
be in the past. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



IX. 



CATHOLIC SOCIETIES. 

(American Catholic Quarterly Review, April, 1879.^) 

BY Catholic Societies we mean those bodies of Cath- 
olics who are united together for some purpose 
more or less relating to religion or morality, and under 
the guidance and approval of the church, an approval 
ordinarily signified by the presence of their chaplain. 
Not every association of Catholics, therefore, is a 
Catholic society, otherwise any banking company, com- 
posed exclusively of Catholic business men, should be 
called a Catholic society or association. We are aware 
that this is sometimes done ; but with bad taste, and 
with more or less harm to religion, often made respon- 
sible in this way for the shortcomings of individuals. 
We remember once reading some sharp remarks of the 
New York Herald } venting its spleen against some one 
by styling him "a professional Catholic." It was wickedly 
witty. But our enemies sometimes shoot these remarks 
at us, not without a certain spice of truth in them. And 
it is to be hoped that the abuse of the word Catholic, 
for business or other purposes not religious, will be con- 
hned to the narrowest limits compatible with human 
frailty. In his late Encyclical our Holy Father, Pope 
Leo XIII., recognizing the existence of societies as a 

i65 



Catholic Societies. 



167 



special feature of this age, and deploring the evil influ- 
ences under which societies generally are, which with 
truthful appreciation he points out, recommends as an 
antidote for the children of the church, the formation 
of other similar societies among laymen under the 
guidance of religion. His words are: " It seems fitting 
that societies of artisans and workmen be encouraged, 
which, placed under the guardianship of religion, may 
make their members content with their lot, patient under 
their burdens, and lead them to live a quiet and tranquil 
life. 

The question, therefore, is not whether we should 
have societies, a question already practically settled, 
and now officially settled by the sovereign pontiff ; 
but how are our societies to be constituted ; how are 
they to be organized; what are the dangers they are 
to guard against ; how are they to stand in relation to 
the church ; how far is the church to wield her influ- 
ence over them ; how far are they to be allowed to 
take their part in solving the labor questions of the 
day ; — all these are very important questions, which we 
shall strive to answer after we shall first have treated 
of societies in general, and the relation of the church 
to them in the past. 

The spirit of association is in man in virtue of his 
very nature. Once the inhabitants of the earth became 
numerous, and the ties of the one family became 
loosened, common interest formed men into nations, 
and varied interests common to a number had the 
effect of making this number cling together, and con- 
stitute a body united together by common customs. 
, The remains of antiquity that have come down to us 



Catholic Societies. 



tell us of the existence of colleges of those whose pur- 
suits were similar ; the well-known college of bakers of 
ancient Rome, for example, and the guilds of the Mid- 
dle Ages are only another confirmation of this ten- 
dency of human nature. The church, whose office is 
not to pervert human nature but to foster it, with her 
characteristic prudence took these associations under 
her protection and guided them in the right path, ex- 
cept where her influence was set at naught by the 
passions of men. She was herself one vast society, and 
the experience she had gained by centuries of expe- 
rience was placed at their disposal. Even at the early 
period of her struggles she had within her these col- 
leges, and in the catacombs are to be seen the repre- 
sentation of the fossores, or guardians of her ceme- 
teries, allusions to coopers and to other tradesmen. 
Acting under the guidance of the Spirit dwelling in 
her she formed the most perfect of colleges — the Reli- 
gious Order, realizing what the Tusculan philosopher 
had written : Omnium societatum nulla praestantior est, 
nulla firmior, quam cum viri boni moribus similes sunt 
familiaritate conjuncti. Off., lib. I. 

We see, therefore, the church, given by God to 
govern and direct the moral order of society, taking 
the association of laymen under her aegis, laying down 
for them laws, endowing them with privileges, and giv- 
ing them a canonical status, which made them respect- 
able ; securing also for them a legal entity, she con- 
ferred importance on them, giving them a legal power 
which checked the daring of the feudal lord who 
chanced to be a tyrant. 

But if they were made what they became by the * 



Catholic Societies. 



169 



power and widespread influence of the church, she did 
not give them full sway to do as they listed. On the 
contrary she curbed them by salutary restraints. From 
time to time it would happen that they forgot them- 
selves, and asserted their independence of their local 
ecclesiastical superior. Then would come the appeal to 
the central authority of the church, and the decision 
reasserting the power of the bishop. There are some 
of these decisions on record, which, as interesting 
exemplifications of what we have said, we introduce 
here. 

It must be remarked that these societies came to 
be known as Confraternities, and were instituted for all 
kinds of purposes, all more or less connected with reli- 
gious exercises. Thus there existed at Lanciano, in 
Italy, a society or Confraternity, known as the society 
for taking care of the dead. These good people came 
into conflict with their archbishop, and the case went 
to Rome. They didn't want him to have anything to 
do with the election of their officers, and much less did 
they desire him to look into their accounts; and if he 
did, they wanted the work done through men of their 
own choosing. The Sacred Congregation of the Coun- 
cil, on the 20th of September, 17 10, decreed, after 
mature deliberation : (1), that they must proceed with 
their election in the presence of the vicar- general, as 
commanded by the archbishop ; (2), that an election 
made otherwise was invalid ; (3), that the election of 
the officers required for its validity the confirmation of 
the archbishop; (4), that the society must give an 
account of its funds and expenses to the archbishop ; 
(5), that the archbishop could make use of his own 



Catholic Societies. 



agents, and was not bound to make use of those chosen 
by the members. 

There was another society at Offida, near Ascoli, 
in Italy. They were also a body of men who, in like 
manner as the above, had as their special object to 
pray for the dead. They had their legal and canon- 
ical status. They differed with their bishop, and the 
case went to Rome. Like those just spoken of they 
tried to keep the bishop from having anything to do 
with their elections, and from auditing their accounts. 
The same Sacred Congregation of the Council, on the 
3d and 24th of March, 1725, decreed, in answer, that 
the bishop, personally or by deputy, could be present 
at the elections ; that he could remove the officers who 
were unfit for their place ; and that the society was 
bound to give an account of their pecuniary adminis- 
tration to the bishop. It is of no use to multiply 
instances. These are enough to show the spirit of the 
church, and her mode of dealing with such societies. 

The societies we have nowadays are of two kinds ; 
one is the Confraternity, as described above ; the other 
is the society which has no recognized legal or canonical 
status, but which consists of laymen united together 
under the patronage of the church for some beneficial 
purpose. They are societies for mutual aid ; and that 
aid, according to the scope to which it tends, generally 
gives the name to the organization. 

It is of these latter societies that we shall now especi- 
ally speak, as they are those which have arisen from the 
circumstances of our time, the outcome of the vicissi- 
tudes of the nineteenth century. 

It may prove a useful guide to us at the outset to 



Catholic Societies. 



171 



remember that these Catholic societies have been ren- 
dered necessary by the secret societies that have 
overspread the nations of the earth. They have been 
constituted as it were in self defence. The manner, 
therefore, in which secret societies have been constituted 
will to some extent give us a clue as to the constitution 
of our Catholic societies. 

It is no secret that the so-called secret societies here 
in America are in .great part merely beneficial associa- 
tions, for mutual aid in sickness or distress, and especially 
for the advancement of business relations. That some 
of them, if not all, have affiliations with the secret 
societies of Europe, societies political and rationalistic, 
as well as beneficial, is a fact known to us ; for we have 
had it from the mouth of those who, not understanding 
the languages of the countries through which they were 
journeying in Europe, found, in spite of that, the sign- 
manual a passport, and a command obeyed with alacrity. 
Their principal feature, however, here, besides their 
secrecy and strange forms, or rituals, is the business and 
beneficial feature. 

From these societies, Catholics are necessarily excluded 
by the circumstances of the case. The oath of secrecy, 
and the false principles which are the basis of these 
societies, sapping the foundation of religion and govern- 
ment, have long since, as we all know, made the sovereign 
authority of the church condemn them formally. The 
exclusion in this way of Catholics makes them look 
around in self-defence for means of protection. The 
movement is general, and we should regard it with 
favor. Our Catholics should band together, come to 
each other's assistance, and give that mutual aid and 



IJ2 



Catholic Societies. 



comfort, and even business help, denied them by the 
other social combinations of the da}* ; for it is an undeni- 
able fact that unless a man belong to some secret trades- 
union, he will hardly be able to find employment. We 
are the last person to wish to array our fellow-Catholics 
against our non- Catholic fellow-countrymen, to whom we 
acknowledge ourselves sincerely attached. But when we 
behold them acting as they do, and treating worthy men 
and faithful citizens with disregard, and neglect, and 
ostracism, because they are conscientious, then we say the 
time has come not to array ourselves in a hostile 
manner against our countrymen, but to band ourselves 
together in self-defence ; then we say the time has come 
for us to stretch out our hands to each other, to employ 
each other, to favor each other, to form societies for 
mutual aid, and for mutual benefit in sickness or distress, 
and to further each other's business relations, to secure 
insurance of property or life, in a word, to form the 
counterpart of the associations from which the laws of the 
church exclude us, but without their objectionable fea- 
tures, and in a spirit of charity which will contrast to 
advantage with the spirit that animates them, and there- 
fore not to the exclusion from employment of non- 
Catholics, who of course are not members of our 
societies. 

Our societies thus constituted as to their general form 
are to be organized on the basis of religion. The 
church which is given us by God to guide us, which is 
God working in the midst of mankind, is our only sure 
corner-stone, and anything standing without her is sure 
to fall. We want our societies to last, to prosper, and 
to do a real good work. The only thing then to be 



Catholic Societies. 



173 



done is to make God's church, first and last, the founda- 
tion and the binding power of our fabric. The way to 
do this is to take as our standard the decisions and 
openly declared principles of the church, to make respect 
for her authority paramount, to resolve that a word from 
her will make us give up any cherished plan ; and all 
this must be from the deepseated conviction of our faith, 
looking on all authority, and especially the authority of 
the church, as of God. Here, again, the principles that 
are the basis of the secret societies in general will serve 
as an indication to us, telling us what principles held and 
taught by the church are to be those especially held as 
guides for our Catholic societies. We find these societies 
standing on a selfish principle. They seek themselves 
at the expense of society, for they disregard the essential 
safeguard of society, authority, when they deem their 
interests require it. The history of these associations, if 
not here, certainly in Europe, is one of plotting against 
government, of thwarting of justice, of violation of trust, 
of violence, bloodshed, and even secret assassination. 
How far anything of this kind takes place here we will 
not go on to say. We know that the excesses of Europe 
have not, thus far, been imitated here ; but that there is 
imitation to some extent of the blamable features of 
European secret societies in this country, is true. We 
shall only mention one fact to show we are not speaking 
wildly. A friend of ours was passing the night with a 
family that had given him hospitality in his journeying. 
The members of the family were all together talking with 
our friend, in saddened tones, of one of their number, 
who had led a bad life and, as a result, had killed a 
man, and was to suffer the penalty of the law by 



i74 



Catholic Societies. 



hanging on the following day. While they were yet 
talking, there was a rap at the door. It was opened, 
and who should walk in but the condemned man him- 
self. For a moment all were breathless ; but when a 
near relative found words to ask him, how it was he 
escaped from prison, his answer was: "Had I not 
been a Freemason, it would have been all up with me." 

It is unlawful to thwart justice; and therefore such 
an act as the above could not be tolerated one 
moment among conscientious Catholics, and could not 
be the act of a Catholic society, whose blazon must 
be respect for authority. In fact, this spirit of obedi- 
ence and respect, and, what is more, love for author- 
ity, is a special characteristic of the True Religion. 
For God is the Author of all things, and the Author 
of all authority. He Himself is Authority itself, and 
any created authority is but a participation of that 
authority which is essentially in Him. In the same 
way we owe to that primal essential authority, God 
Himself, obedience, respect, and love, so do we owe 
to the created participation of it a proportionate degree 
of obedience, respect, and love. This is the reason 
why the Catholic should set himself against that spirit 
born of Protestantism, private judgment and self-asser- 
tion, which leads men to condemn authority, to look 
on it with jealousy as an enemy, and to cherish un- 
kindly feelings towards those that exercise it, even 
though they exercise it justly. Catholics, on the con- 
trary, must follow the advice of the Apostle, obey 
cheerfully, and from conscience, that those ruling them 
may discharge their onerous duties in joy, and not in 
sorrow. 



Catholic Societies. 



175 



Another dangerous principle against which Catholic 
societies must guard, and with regard to which they 
will find the church guiding them in the right way, is 
the leveling tendency of the day. If any one will 
take up the preamble of some of the trades-unions, he 
will find therein more or less of socialistic theory — the 
arraying of the working classes against the moneyed 
class, and it may be that he will find the condition 
that when a member becomes an employer, he must 
cease to be a member. He becomes one of the hostile 
class. Certainly this state of things is not Christian. 
We are not going to censure unduly the working 
class ; we feel more disposed in our heart to censure 
the wealthy class, whose grasping at wealth has 
brought about this uprising against them. But unde- 
niably both classes are wrong. Each has ignored the 
other ; each disregards the rights of the other. As the 
sovereign pontiff, in the Encyclical, Quod apostolici 
muneris, beautifully and learnedly writes : " Catholic 
wisdom, taking its stand on the precepts of natural and 
divine law, has with great forethought provided for 
public and domestic tranquillity by means of what she 
believes and teaches with regard to the right of 
dominion, or of property, and the division of those 
possessions which have been gotten together for the 
wants and uses of life. For, while socialists traduce the 
right of property as an invention of man, repugnant to 
natural equality ; and, affecting a community of goods, 
think that poverty is not to be borne with equanimity, 
but that the possessions and rights of the wealthy can 
be violated with impunity ; the church with more pro- 
priety and utility recognizes among men, differing 



Catholic Societies. 



naturally in the strength of their body and intellect, in- 
equality also in the possession of property ; and requires 
that the right of property and dominion, which is from 
nature itself, be for every one sacred from the hands of 
others and inviolate." 

How true is this ! One man is born almost an idiot, 
another with talent ; will the career of these two be 
the same, their success the same ? One man has health, 
the other is a cripple; will these two be equal in the 
results of their physical labor ? One man has given 
him the advantages of education, and culture, and 
experience ; the other's lot is ignorance and neglect ; 
will their social position and influence be the same ? 
The socialists themselves know it is their men of edu- 
cation that lead them ; they follow. 

There is no such thing as universal equality. It is 
a figment of the wild brain of the agitator, coquet- 
ting with the ignorance of the mass of mankind. We 
are equal in this, that God loves us all, wishes us all 
to be saved, and will judge us all according to our 
works, without respect of persons. We are said to be 
equal before the laws of our country. Beyond this, 
there is and can be no equality, unless you change 
nature, which even the socialists will not pretend they 
have the power of doing. 

The first duty, therefore, of a Catholic society, after 
recognizing the right of God to our obedience, is to 
recognize the rights of one's neighbor, the right of 
property, the right to liberty undisturbed by interfer- 
ence of others, the right to social position, the right to 
influence and reputation honestly gained by talent, in- 
dustry, and good conduct, the right of each one to 



Catholic Societies. 



177 



lead a life of tranquillity and happiness ; in a word, the 
rule of charity which does unto others as we should 
wish them to do unto us — this is to be the principle of 
action among Catholic societies. We are to respect 
inviolably the rights of others as we look to having 
our own respected. If the Catholics who compose 
these societies of ours will take care to follow the de- 
cisions and teaching of their church, they will have an 
unerring rule, by which to discharge this great and 
imperative duty ; while by doing so they will show 
themselves to be the salt of the earth. 

How are Catholic societies to stand in relation to 
the church, is a point which may receive a different 
answer, according to the way in which one understands 
the question. We simply say, first, that every one in 
the church is subject to the higher powers in it, in 
all that relates to spiritual matters ; secondly, that in 
what is temporal, it would seem advisable that the 
liberty of administering their own affairs should be inter- 
fered with as little as possible by church authority. 
But they should always cherish a loyal and submissive 
spirit towards the church, God's representative on 
earth. How far the church should wield her influence 
over them is a delicate question. But when we con- 
sider that she is given us from above as the guide to 
truth, there can be no other opinion but that, as the 
influence of the church should penetrate our whole life 
and influence every action of ours, in accordance with 
the great expression of St. Paul, " The just man liveth 
by faith;" so this influence should be felt in the same 
manner in every Catholic body of men. This influence 
should be represented in them by their chaplain, who, 



1 7 8 



Catholic Societies. 



if for no other reason, should be there to keep the 
members from being indoctrinated with the false notions 
of to-day, so easily taken up from the newspapers, even 
so-called Catholic newspapers, from the workshop, and 
from the example and principles of men of like avoca- 
tions, banded together in secret organization. We 
consider this of the very first importance ; for it cannot 
be denied that not a few Catholics of the lower walks 
of life have imbibed socialistic principles to a greater 
or less extent. They have forgotten their catechism, 
and are learning the catechism of the secret societies. 

There remains one point more to be dwelt on — how 
far any Catholic society can be permitted to take part 
in meeting the labor questions of the day. The 
matter is a very extensive one, and we do not pre- 
tend to exhaust it in a few words. Still, certain 
principles can be laid down that are very important. 
The labor question, as understood by those who 
generally speak of it, is the question not of finding 
work, for the demand regulates the supply, but the 
struggle between employers and employed. It is 
carried on by the trades unions on the one side and 
capitalists on the other. The action of the union is 
ordinarily despotic. They settle the question of strikes, 
and how much is to be asked as wages. If capitalists 
always gave fair wages, we may confidently say there 
would be no need of such associations with such an 
aim. But it is notorious that greed of wealth does 
not often allow capitalists to be generous or even 
just. Hence the poor hardworking man seeks support 
in combinations and in his numbers. The order given 
must be carried out ; the strike is ordered, and woe 



Catholic Societies, 



179 



to the man who will not take part in it. What is 
worse, if any one presumes to work in spite of the 
prohibition, he is made to understand that he must 
desist on pain of risk to life or limb, and the threat 
is very often carried out. 

We suppose the existence of a Catholic trades- 
union, for our ordinary societies have nothing to do 
with this question ; their scope lies in a different 
direction. Obviously, a Catholic society could not 
countenance active interference with the rights of 
others ; it could not take the law into its own hands ; 
it could not foster sedition, destruction of property, 
violence and bloodshed. There is one right, however, 
the members have, and which they could not be denied 
the use of. As they can hire out their labor, so if 
they do not think the remuneration sufficient, they can 
refuse to work singly, or in a body. They can use all 
lawful means to gain their point ; but they cannot go 
further. But even this exercise of right might be in 
abeyance, owing to the danger of civil discord that 
might arise ; and it should, therefore, be used with 
moderation. We apprehend that among Catholics, who 
are not so only in name, such a state of tension would 
be next to impossible ; for charity on the part of the 
employer and reason on the part of the workman, 
would settle the matter at once, or prevent its coming 
up. Still, the conflict is possible, and the men have 
their right to labor or not as they wish ; but, as we 
have said, no right beyond what the law of God, and 
the law of the land when not in contradiction with 
God's law, allows them. They could, therefore, to that 
extent, and to that extent alone, sympathize with their 



i So 



Catholic Societies. 



fellow-workmen and take part in the solution of the 
question of just remuneration. They would, however, 
even in this, encounter stumbling-blocks, for they 
would find that many of the labor associations are 
led on by men whose principles are socialistic, and 
they would for this reason find that many propositions 
are broached and measures initiated which would not 
observe the just and natural relations of labor and 
capital. In reality the laborer has no right to a cent 
more than he has contracted for. He is at liberty not 
to enter into the contract ; once he has done so he 
must keep his word. 

We do not refer to instances of grinding exaction 
on the part of employers taking advantage of the 
poverty of their employees. But we speak of those 
who aspire to get possession of their employer's goods, 
to have a community of goods. They form their own 
ideas of how much they ought to have of the profits, 
and take advantage of their employer's straits to force 
him to terms. This is what checks industry, and con- 
tributes to people the country with tramps. Ordinarily 
speaking, the daily support of the man himself and of 
his wife and children, ought to be the least remunera- 
tion a good workman should receive ; what his wife 
could make should go to provide for the future. 
Skilled labor should, of course, receive proportionately 
more. Once workmen receive this amount they have 
no just reason to complain. They should stifle envy, 
and, to use the words of Pope Leo XIII., learn to 
live contented with the lot God has given them. 
What will certainly make the Catholic workman so live 
is the truth so beautifully announced by the Apostles : 



Catholic Societies. 



181 



we have no permanent citizenship here, but we look 
for another. We are not here forever ; we are 
journeying to our real country and home, the here- 
after ; and our status or condition there depends not 
on worldly wealth or influence, but upon our works 
done here, so that it is in every man's power to 
secure for himself a high position and a great degree of 
glory in his true home. If any man will keep this 
well before his eyes he will find it a powerful help 
to make him content with the station of life Providence 
has allotted him. 

We close these few remarks with an observation re- 
garding the importance of our Catholic societies looking 
to the church more than ever for guidance. There never 
was a period when wilder theories were broached, more 
extensively circulated, or more read by the people. In 
our own midst we have hosts of Europeans, many of 
them clever and well-educated, who were forced to leave 
their respective countries because of their efforts to over- 
throw social order. These men have become editors of 
newspapers, and have been feeding our simpler American 
population with what they call their advanced ideas, till 
we hardly recognize the land of our youth. These false 
ideas in religion and in the social order the church 
examined thoroughly where they first arose. She has 
condemned them, and her condemnation has been met 
with an acknowledgment that she has spoken truly, but at 
the same time with a cry of defiance. Let us, therefore, 
stand to this church, which has the Spirit of Wisdom from 
above ; let us have as our compass the Syllabus of the 
great Pius IX. ; let us reverently receive and emblazon on 
our banner the late Encyclical of the learned Leo XIII. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



x. 



THE FREQUENCY OF SUICIDE. 



{The Catholic World, February, 1882). 



HERE has just now been published by Appleton & 



1 Co. an abridged English translation of Professor 
Morselli's work on the frequency of suicide. It is a 
carefully-prepared work, based, as the author tells us, on 
the analysis of facts which lead him to his synthetical 
conclusions. There is a great array of statistics which 
he acknowledges are not altogether what he could desire 
— not always corresponding in date and period. Still, 
it is a very valuable collection, and, though it may be 
said statistics mislead, we think in this case they cannot 
mislead substantially, and we can therefore trust the 
learned professor in his presentation of them and in many 
of his deductions ; others we can learn from the facts 
ourselves. 

The first conclusion at which he arrives, as others 
have done before him, and which he proves by his tables, 
is that from the beginning of the present century there 
has been a steady increase in suicide. This is a fact ; 
and he shows that the latest statistics tell of the highest 
increase. 

What is the meaning of this frightful and most abnor- 
mal development of human society ? Can anything be 




182 



The Frequency of Suicide. 183 



imagined more out of keeping with all the theories of 
progress, enlightenment, and culture ? We thought we 
were, in this nineteenth century, in the most pros- 
perous and happy period of the existence of our race 
since man first appeared upon this planet ! And yet 
here are men putting a stop to all progress, enlighten- 
ment, and culture by taking a plunge in the dark — in 
fact, putting an end to their existence. If this is not a 
comment on our civilization it is hard to say what is. 
There is something wrong somewhere. What is it ? 

It cannot be the ignorance and the barbarity of the 
people. The professor shows this with his eloquent tables 
and his strict logical deductions. Page 132 he tells us 
that, of the four nations he mentions, " Prussia stands 
first both as to education and suicides ; France comes 
next, second in both sociological characteristics ; lastly, 
Italy and Hungary." Turn to the ethnological map of 
Europe, and you find that the Russian dominions, except 
the portions near the Baltic arid St. Petersburg, are 
remarkably free from suicides. The Russians of all 
this vast region are certainly far behind in culture ; the 
cultured portion near the Baltic give proof of their prog- 
ress by increased frequency of suicide. 

It cannot be claimed that climatic influences have very 
much to do with this increase, because the climate of 
Europe has not changed from what it was in the early 
part of the century. Moreover, the advance in mechanic- 
al means of protection against the depressing influence 
of climate enables people to bear up against it better 
than they used to. 

There is no use seeking for any other than a moral 
cause for the increase of suicide. 



The Frequency of Suicide. 



Undoubtedly the wild speculation and greed for wealth 
which characterize this period play a very important 
part in this phenomenon. Many minds are unsettled, 
and not a few suicides result from insanity. We re- 
member having heard a physician speak of a case of 
attempted suicide to which he was called. The sufferer 
had been intemperate, and his mind gave way. It was 
during a At of insanity that he cut his throat. The care 
of the physician brought him safely out of his perilous 
state, and he gave an account of how he happened to 
resort to so desperate an attempt. He said that he was 
laboring under an hallucination. He found himself con- 
tinually annoyed by a little black imp, who sat on his 
shoulder, and when driven off one shoulder went to the 
other, always caressing him and saying strange words. 
One day he went to shave, and the imp was there as 
usual. He continued his troublesome caresses, and, when 
the man took the razor in his hand, kept saying : " Cut, 
it will do you good ; cut, it will do you good." Urged 
on by this fatal influence, he drew the razor across his 
throat. It can hardly be doubted but that this is a fair 
explanation of not a few suicides. But it does not meet 
the majority of cases, especially where fixed, steady pur- 
pose has been shown, as in the case of remarkable 
suicides of the past and present well known to all. 

The real cause of this increase in the frequency of 
suicide is to be found either in the state of society 
brought about by the rejection of revealed religion, 
or else in the adoption of that form of revealed religion 
which, by upsetting the order that the Founder of 
Christianity, who made human nature, had established in 
accordance to its wants, rejected authoritative teaching 



The Frequency of Suicide. 



185 



and substituted for such authority the use of private 
judgment. The strain upon the human mind in striving 
to grasp and understand what cannot be grasped or 
understood by a finite mind has often ended in disaster 
and self-destruction. Hopeless in their effort, always 
striving after the certainty of truth, and never being able 
to attain it, men look on death as a relief, as what will 
solve the problem that puzzles them — long for it and 
seek it. The author says, somewhat naively, the mystic 
and metaphysical character of Protestantism has much to 
do with the preponderance of suicide among those who 
profess it. 

Before we call the professor to our aid in this solution 
of the question we shall state that he is an enthusiastic 
admirer of Darwin, Tyndall, John Stuart Mill, and 
Herbert Spencer. This fact will give value to his con- 
clusions and assertions, should they favor the view given 
above. We wish, too, to enter a protest against what 
he calls the law of increase in frequency of suicide. That 
there has been this proportionate yearly increase in 
many cases is a fact ; but not a universal fact, as he him- 
self admits in the case of Norway and of England. 
There is therefore no law, properly so called. This 
graded increase is to be sought rather in the hurtful 
influences of irreligion and modern social theories, which 
year by year are more widely spread with the facilities 
men have in publishing and in circulating their ideas 
everywhere. Such facilities have been going on, increas- 
ing too, undoubtedly, in a well-defined proportion. 
There is here merely the relation of cause and effect ; 
and man remains a free, responsible agent, who is to give 
an account of his act in taking his own life. Let us now 



i86 



The Frequency of Suicide. 



direct our attention to the tables and maps found in the 
work before us. 

Table xvi., p. 122, gives us the influence of religion 
on the tendency to suicide. Although in this table the 
data refer to different periods as regards the different 
countries, they belong to the same period with respect to 
the same country, and they justify the author in saying 
that he has been able to ascertain the frequency of 
suicide among individuals of different religions in the 
countries he puts in this list. 

In Table No. xvi. we have the following proportional 
rate of suicide among Catholics and Protestants, per 
million of each religion : 

Catholics Protestants 
per million. per million. 



In Bavaria (1866-67) 56.7 152.7 

In Upper Bavaria (1851-52, 56—57) 56 237 

In Lower Bavaria (1851-52, 56-57) 28 148 

In Prussia (1869-72) 69 187 

In Austria (1852-54, 58-59) 51.3 79.5 

In Bohemia (1858-59) 69 132 

In Upper Austria 41 68 

In Lower Austria 105 247 

In Galicia 45 16 

In Bukovina 80 — 

Military frontiers 28 25 



These extracts will suffice for our purpose ; the general 
average of excess of suicides among Protestants in this 
table is three or two to one among Catholics. In study- 
ing the table it would seem to result that where Catholics 
largely preponderate, their influence over their non- 
Catholic neighbors is beneficial in reducing the number of 
suicides — as, for example, in Austria and in Bohemia : 
while in Bavaria, where Catholics are only about 71 



The Frequency of Suicide. 



i8 7 



per cent., their influence being comparatively weaker, the 
proportion of suicides is nearly three Protestants to one 
Catholic. The learned professor, who is willing to con- 
cede everything he can to the positivists of his day, is too 
honest not to see something very significant in these 
figures. Page 125 he writes: " The very high average 
of suicides among Protestants is another fact too general 
to escape being ascribed to the influence of religion." 
He goes on to give further explanation which has un- 
doubtedly foundation in fact ; the most salient feature of 
this explanation is that the neglect of religious ideas 
which naturally would have an influence to check suicide 
comes from the little hold any ideas have on the mind of 
men, except such as are directed to material improvement 
and the gratification of ambition. Naturally when a 
reverse comes there is no religious foundation to fall back 
on. It is a pity that the professor does not see that the 
very philosophical principles which directly tend to breed 
and foster such a state of things are not, as he says, 
" harmless to strong minds." It is these strong minds 
that will develop and reduce to practice these theories 
with increased evil to themselves and to their fellow- men. 

We may be pardoned for not looking on as quite fair 
the remark he makes on p. 126, regarding the relative 
frequency of suicide among Catholics and Protestants. 
He says : " Where the tendency of suicide is great 
among Protestants it will be found to be also high 
among Catholics, as may be observed in the statistics 
already quoted of Baden, Wiirtemberg, Franconia, Gali • 
cia, Bavaria, etc." Why he brings in Bavaria here, 
with the table before us, we are at a loss to see. In 
Upper Bavaria the proportion of suicides of Protestants 



iSS 



The Frequency of Suicide. 



to suicides of Catholics is about 4 to 1 ; in Lower 
Bavaria. 5 to 1 ; in Bavaria in 1857—66, 2^/2 to 1 ; in 
Bavaria in 1866-6/, nearly 3 to I. The other countries 
he cites above do not compare in all respects to those we 
have given in the table above. The Catholics in Baden 
are 65 per cent, of the population ; in AViirtemberg a 
little over 30 per cent.; in Lower Franconia, where the 
Catholic population is 80^2 per cent., the suicides are, 
among Catholics 1, among Protestants over 3 ; in Central 
Franconia, where the Catholics are 21.9 per cent, of the 
population, suicides among Catholics are 1 to among 
Protestants ; in Upper Franconia, percentage of Cath- 
olics 42 4, the suicides are 1 to a little less than 2 
among Protestants ; in Galicia, percentage of Catholics 
44.7, suicides among Catholics 3^ to 1 among Protes- 
tants ; in Bukovina the proportion is against Catholics, 
as also in the military frontiers. These latter regions — 
Galicia, Bukovina, and the military frontiers — are 
guarded frontiers. . It would be interesting to know 
how many among these suicides were soldiers, their 
followers or attendants, and how man} 7 of such cases 
were Catholics from other parts of the empire. The 
author says, p. 259, that suicides in the Austrian army 
are very numerous. However, these three mentioned 
provinces are an exception to the general rule which 
results from the examination of the statistics : that where 
CatJwlics are the more numerous they not only are far 
below Protestants in the proportion of suicides ; they exert 
also a healthy i?ifluence on Protesta?its in restraini7ig tJiem 
from committing suicide, while where Protestants predomi- 
nate they exert a hurtful influence on Catholics which leads 
to more frequent suicide. 



The Frequency of Suicide. 



189 



Leaving the statistics, we take up the map, colored 
and lined in proportion to frequency of suicide. What 
countries are freest from suicide ? Looking over the 
map, we find in this category Spain, Ireland, Roumania 
— the population of which last is largely of the Greek 
and Catholic churches — and Italy. Next comes Russia, 
the religion of which is the so-called orthodox Greek, 
with the priesthood and sacraments of the Catholic 
Church ; also Scotland and Wales. England, according 
to Professor Morselli, has remained for a considerable time 
stationary in regard to suicide, coming third in the 
scale. The lowest place is held by Lower Austria, 
Saxony, Saxe-Meiningen, and the Isle of France. With 
regard to Lower Austria it must be remarked that 
suicides, both of Catholics and non-Catholics, are summed 
up together in this latter conclusion, and the total is 
three hundred and fifty-two per million, plus a doubtful 
number of Jewish cases. The He de France has within 
it the enormous and heterogeneous population of Paris, 
with its host of men without religion and a good number 
of non-Catholics professing belief in Christ. 

A second map which merits close attention is that of 
Italy, the study of which will repay us ; for it is wonder- 
fully instructive. The revolution has been at work there 
for over thirty years. What is the state of the peninsula 
regarding suicide ? 

The professor's map gives us the relative proportions 
of the different provinces. The smallest number of sui- 
cides is found in the old kingdom of the Two Sicilies. 
Next comes the Roman district, with severai portions of 
the kingdom of Italy. Next to the very lowest place 
comes Milan, the " moral capital " of new Italy. The 



go 



The Frequency of Suicide. 



lowest place on the scale is occupied by the districts of 
Bologna, Modena, Mantua, and Forli ! To any one 
who knows Italy these facts are very eloquent.^ The 
Italian revolution has had Bologna in its coils for over 
twenty years. That university which did so much for 
Catholicity and civilization, has been a thorough means 
of perversion of youth from obedience to the Catholic 
Church, and its baneful influence has almost made 
Bologna a byword in Italy. Milan is not much better ; 
it is a commercial city and at the head of modern mate- 
rial progress, and its influence, in an anti-papal sense, 
has been so great as to merit in Italy the appellation we 
have given above. In Rome and its district we have no 
means, as far as we see in the professor's book, of con- 
trasting the Rome of the king with the Rome of the 
pope. Suffice it to say that to hear of a suicide during 
our residence there under Pius IX. 's rule was the rarest of 
things ; to hear of suicide after Rome fell into the hands 
of the Piedmontese and became overrun with people from 
the north of Italy, and from every part of it in fact, was 
a frequent occurrence. In the old Neapolitan kingdom, 
which has always retained a very cordial dislike of the 
Northern Italians and a great attachment to its clergy 
and Catholic customs, so as even to defy in Naples the 
efforts of the Piedmontese iconoclasts— to its credit be it 
said — there is less suicide than in any other part of Italy. 
And of this section of the peninsula the freest from this 
moral blot is the Terra di Lavoro. Here certainly is 
everything that could keep men from making away with 
themselves. Not only does religion flourish there, but 
the soil is rich and the people industrious. Coming 
from the sterile Campagna of Rome, one seems to enter 



The Frequency of Suicide. 191 

into the garden spot of Italy. We remember well, one 
September morning, passing through the heart of this 
province in the train for Naples. Having left on our 
right the picturesque abbey of Monte Casino on its 
rocky height, the home of St. Benedict and the store- 
house of knowledge and the nursery of art in the middle 
ages, which has not lost its reputation in this our day, 
we were rapidly carried southward. We soon found 
ourselves in the midst of the vine-clad hills, on which stood 
forests of elm trees, the vines clinging to them and hanging 
in graceful curves from one tree to the next, realizing 
the idea that so pleased the Mantuan Bard — the vine 
wedded to the elm. Suddenly we came upon a group 
of young men and women clad in the picturesque attire 
of the people ; they stood with their heads turned to us 
and fixed as in a tableau. A young man was on a 
short ladder placed against an elm, holding on to the 
round with one hand, while with the other he was in 
the act of gathering grapes from a richly clustered 
festoon. On the ground below stood a young girl, her 
apron spread to catch the fruit as it fell. Two other 
young women were in the act of placing the grapes in a 
pannier ; while a youth stood by the faithful little animal 
which was to bear the burden — a demure little donkey 
that took his part in the group, not marring it by any 
movement, as the train swept by. The beauty of the 
scenery, the bright and happy faces of the young people, 
the nature of their work, the grace of their pose, and the 
picturesque beauty of their garb, altogether made such 
a scene as an artist would fain paint. Surely this land 
has every physical characteristic to bring about a con- 
tented spirit and exorcise the demon of suicide. When 



192 The Frequency of Suicide. 



to this we add the influence of religion, to which the 
people are strongly attached from the conviction of their 
bright intellects and by the love of their warm hearts, 
one can readily understand why, of all Italy, it should be 
perhaps the privileged spot where men think least of 
insulting their Creator by usurping his right of life and 
of death. 

It is not, however, on the physical or psychological 
conditions of a country that the rarity of suicide depends. 
Trouble comes everywhere ; care enthrones herself in 
the palace and in the hovel, on the smiling prairie and 
on the rocky mountain side. There is needed some- 
thing else. That something is not the development in 
man of " the power of well-ordered sentiments and ideas 
by which to reach a certain aim in life — in short, to give 
force and energy to the moral character" by the means 
Professor Morselli recommends. It is not this. The real 
means is religion so cherished as to become the life 
of the people. Do you want a proof? Look at Ireland, 
a Catholic people by excellence. Here is a people 
ground down by centuries of religious persecution ; their 
priesthood proscribed ; their worship forbidden ; the 
education of their children unlawful ; their families re- 
duced to poverty, to live on the wild products of nature, 
the roots of the forest and the weeds of the sea ; even 
those who could raise themselves a little above the lot 
of the rest allowed to till the land at a rack-rent which 
tardy justice is only now reducing one-half. So wretch- 
edly has the economical condition of this people been 
administered that Ireland has become almost the classical 
land of poverty and famine. Was there ever a state of 
things more likely to foster a tendency to suicide ? 



The Frequency of Suicide. 



193 



Where was the aim in life for this people, debarred from 
every position of political preferment, of social standing, 
or of acquired wealth ? There was no aim in life for 
them ; but there was an aim beyond this life, and that 
aim was God ! To God and to His religion they clung; 
and in the day of dark despondency the eye of faith, 
piercing the darkness, saw beyond the light eternal of 
the house of their Father. This kept them up ; this 
formed their character ; this gave them an aim in the 
life to come and in that of the present ; this made this 
gifted people an example to the world of sound morality 
and of sterling love of virtue. Their history has demon- 
strated to the world what it is sustains man in trial and 
forms the character of man ; it has shown that the pre- 
ventive of self-destruction is not to be found in the 
schemes of the rationalistic professor, but in the super- 
natural power of the religion of Christ, the Redeemer of 
the world. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



XI. 



DARWIN'S MISTAKE. 

{The Catholic World, June, 1884.) 

NOT long ago there was published the reply of the 
late Charles Darwin to the letter of a German 
student, J. N. Doedes, dated 1873, which attracted a great 
deal of attention to his system of reasoning in his scien- 
tific treatises, and very justly. There is no denying the 
ability of the celebrated naturalist, the reputed author of 
the so-called system of evolution. His knowledge of 
facts is remarkable ; his patient study wonderful ; his de- 
ductions, while strictly within the limits of natural science 
or comparative anatomy, most frequently not to be gain- 
said. But in this letter he has given the key to his 
method, and we have accounted for the extraordinary 
bound by which he leaped to his conclusion that all ani- 
mals have a common ancestor and that species have 
evolved one from the other. We use the word extraor- 
dinary advisedly, because this proceeding is not in ac- 
cordance with the sound reasoning that should obtain in 
the study of natural facts. He has not reached it by the 
proper study and correlation of facts. He noticed the 
resemblances between the various orders of animal life 
and guessed at his conclusion, and that in the very face 

194 



Darwin s Mistake. 



195 



of facts revealed by the accurate study of the relation of 
species among themselves. It is a well-known fact that 
a species maintains itself, propagates itself; does not pass 
into another, though there may be races comprised under 
each species ; moreover, when violently joined with an- 
other species, or rather race of widely differing character- 
istics, hybrids are produced which are not prolific. This 
is the general, well-known law. So well known is this 
that to note the exceeding fertility of the province of 
Rieti, in Italy, there is a common saying that " in terra 
Reatina inula peperit" — a mule brought forth there. Yet, 
in the face of this law, Darwin asserts the convertibility of 
species — makes all one family, with power of reproduc- 
tion among the members of it. And he does this in spite 
of the fact that he can show no link, fossil or other, of 
any such transformation of species. He acknowledges he 
cannot. He puts the question to himself, and says he 
cannot completely answer it. But he immediately tries to 
answer it, and says his fossils of missing links have not 
yet been found, it is true, but he believes that they are 
buried in submerged continents. On this point Dr. Con- 
stantine James, in his recent work, Moses and Darwin, 
of which we shall make frequent use in this article, very 
justly remarks that it is strange the fossils should be 
found in their proper strata, according to time, and yet 
the intervening fossils of Darwinian transformations should 
nowhere be seen. He speaks of Darwin's use of Lyell's 
comparison of the archives of nature, and laughingly says 
that these archives are a very strange book, of which 
every alternate page is wanting. It is not necessary to 
call attention to the numerous following of clever men 
the Darwinian theory has. The names of Huxley, 



196 



Darwin s Mistake. 



Biichner, Haeckel, etc., are too well known. How is it 
that all these brilliant intellects have gone wild over this 

theory ? 

To us, especially after the letter cited above, the answer 
is easy. Darwin started out with the practical disbelief 
in a Creator. He acknowledges, in this reply, that he 
knew of no proof of the existence of a God, and, this be- 
ing the case, he ignored the Creator entirely. It must be 
said he was not frank in this. He was afraid to say it. 
He used expressions that misled many into a conviction 
that he did believe in a Creator, and in this he did a great 
deal of harm with the incautious. It was the fashion to 
say that Darwin's disciples were responsible for atheistical 
conclusions, not he. Those who read his first edition of 
the Origin of Species saw there his statement that animals 
received "the breath of life." The expression is Script- 
ural, and naturally was understood in the Scriptural sense 
of man's creation. He was violently attacked for this by 
Haeckel, Mile. Clemence Royer, his translator, and others 
In his second edition he gives up the obnoxious expres- 
sion, and in an apologetic tone says he did not intend to 
convey the Scriptural meaning, but thought the wording 
well adapted to show our ignorance of what really did 
take place ; and that, perhaps, he should have used some 
other expression! What does all this mean, if not that 
Darwin really did start out with a disbelief in a personal 
God ; that he was a pantheist ; that his school is panthe- 
istic, and that, this being so, he and his are perfectly 
logical in their assertions ? We shall endeavor to show 
this briefly. 

Any one who starts out with such a principle as the 
negation of a personal God has no other refuge but to 



Darwin s Mistake. 



197 



attribute to matter all the energy that exists and is 
possible. To him matter becomes God. This is the 
inevitable conclusion of every one who denies even one 
essential attribute of the Divinity. He must, therefore, 
exclude any plan outside of matter itself. Any other 
procedure he is right, from his standpoint, in calling 
absurd, or, more delicately, unscientific, as Darwin does 
in his Descent of Man (c. i. p. 24, Appleton & Co., 1876). 
In his mind matter is the only factor, an impersonal 
one, a blind one, developing itself by a law of its own, 
a necessity of its nature. It is the old proposition over 
again, that God develops himself in nature, condemned 
by the oecumenical council of the church. This mode 
of development, absurd as it must be to any believer in 
God the Creator of all things, is by no means unphilo- 
sophical in the eyes of Darwin, Biichner, Huxley, and 
Haeckel, with their followers. Matter with them is 
capable of spontaneously evolving itself into all possible 
forms. Such energy belongs to it necessarily. So all 
things visible have come from it. Circumstances sur- 
rounding any object are a sufficient reason to account for 
the peculiar development or evolution of the matter it 
contains. The seeds of plants and the ova of animals, 
all come spontaneously from matter, are this natural 
divinity developing or evolving itself ; and therefore we 
can readily understand how similarity of parts and pro- 
gressive development are convincing proof that what is 
has come out of what is similar to it and prior to it. 
Spontaneous generation of the seeds and ova, of the 
germs of all things, first came about ; and this impulse 
inherent in matter, continuing in its ever-increasing 
ctivity, suffices to produce the never-ending work of 



Danviris Mistake. 



evolution, one species giving origin to the one next in 
order. 

We pause here for a moment to remark that such evo- 
lutionists are, in making the above assertion, guilty of 
most unscientific teaching. They are, moreover, in a 
dilemma: they must so teach from their principles ; while, 
on the other hand, the researches of Professors Tyndall 
and Pasteur, with others, have convincingly proved that 
there is no such thing as spontaneous generation. This 
is the deduction from facts, and all positivists must admit 
that a deduction from carefully observed facts is a scien- 
tific deduction. The pantheistic school, to begin their 
reasoning, must perforce admit as a postulatum spon- 
taneous generation, and science tells us there is no such 
thing. The result of starting out in this way leads a man 
to construct his theories beforehand and adapt his facts 
to them. Everything that does not agree with his ideas 
is to be swept aside disdainfully as unscientific; for his 
ideas, logically in keeping with his first principle, pan- 
theism, must necessarily be right. In this view we have 
taken of the system of reasoning of the Darwinian school 
it is a source of great satisfaction to us to have the sup- 
port of such an authority as Agassiz. This distinguished 
naturalist writes as follows: "Darwin, by the disdain 
he affects for material proofs (apropos of his ' missing 
link,' and supposition of submerged continents which 
contain them), recalls that school of thinkers who, taking 
their inspiration from Schelling, applied his philosophy 
to natural history. Then, too, was seen acclaimed a 
doctrine, ready-made, embracing all nature, and offering 
no other guarantee but the infatuation of its authors. 
I believe Darwin's teaching will meet with the same fate 



Darwin } s Mistake. 



199 



which overtook that of this sect."* It must be remem- 
bered that Schelling's philosophy is pantheistic, and that 
the infidel philosophers following in his wake threw aside 
everything that Christianity holds dear, to see, later on, 
their efforts fail and the religion of revelation assert a 
still stronger hold on the human mind. So will it be 
with the pantheistic school of to-day. If nothing else 
will convert them, men of judgment will understand that 
a system which confounds man with the brute creation, 
takes away free-will and responsibility, and opens the 
gate to the free indulgence of passion, which in the 
masses even now is developing in the forms of social- 
ism, anarchism, and nihilism, cannot be a sound one ; 
for no sound system produces such fruit, and from the 
fruits one comes to know the tree. 

Darwin's system, therefore, has a sin of origin which 
taints it essentially and vitiates his conclusions, as far as 
they are deduced from his first principle— pantheism. 
His conclusions, as we have already said, when strictly 
in accord with the sound principles of comparative 
anatomy which made the name of Cuvier one that will 
outlast his, are most worthy of respect and evince his 
undoubted ability. Having, however, unscientifically 
leaped to his conclusion, it is curious to mark how he is 
dominated by it in such a way as to draw the very 
gravest deductions from the very weakest grounds, or 
rather from no ground at all. Let us take for example, a 
very important and capital instance on which Darwin 
bases his deduction that man came from a fish. 

We are not aware that Darwin lays claim to being 
a physiologist. But he supports his views by frequent 

* Quoted by James, p. 236. 



200 



Darwin s Mistake. 



citations of what he thinks favors them, from physiolo- 
gists of name. In his Descent of Man (c. i. pp. 9, 10) 
he speaks of the similarity of the human foetus with 
that of other animals, and especially with the fish, and 
he refers to the branchiae, or gills, of the foetus, in 
which later on are to be seen " the slits on the sides 
of the neck " where the gills were. He gives from 
Ecker a drawing of a human embryo at the twenty- 
fifth day. The impression left on the mind of the 
reader is that here is the convincing proof that man 
came from a fish, for he has gills ! The fish developed 
into an animal with lungs by frequently-repeated acts 
which forced the gills down into the breast, and so the 
gills became lungs ! Now, what is the real state of the 
case ? The human embryo, in the early state such as 
this drawing represents, having no attachment by which 
to draw sustenance from the mother, gets its susten- 
ance indirectly from her through the medium of the 
fluid in which it floats. The absorption must take 
place through the arteries, which must come in contact 
with this fluid for such a purpose. Hence the arteries 
form the arches which are in contact with the fluid and 
therefore necessarily outermost. When the placental 
formation takes place, then the exposed condition of 
the arteries is no longer necessary, and they recede into 
the interior of the body, leaving the marks where they 
were exposed in the neck. In the meantime the air- 
passages, entirely distinct from these arteries, begin to 
form, and, coalescing with them so as to be immediately 
in contact with the arteries, which, as it were, come to 
meet them to be enveloped by them, the lungs are 
formed, useless till birth, because the blood circulating 



Darwin's Mistake. 



201 



in the placenta takes its nutrition entirely by exosmo- 
sis from the blood of the mother. Huxley and Haeckel 
could easily have seen this and understood it ; they 
could have comprehended that an accidental resemblance 
of the arteries, disposed as above, to the gills of a 
fish in the embryo, did not constitute them essentially 
the same thing, inasmuch as the gills are for breathing, 
while these arterial arches are for nutrition. That ac- 
cidental resemblance came from both the fish and the 
foetus floating independently in the fluid from which 
they draw what they need — the fish the oxygen re- 
quired for the blood, the fcetus the oxygenized matter 
from the mother for nutrition. The condition of the 
fcetus is temporary and transient, and in no way can 
such a thing as gills be made out. The gills are a 
permanent, essential organism of the fish, made to live 
and die in the water from which it draws oxygen; the 
arterial arches of the fcetus, on the other hand, have 
only an accidental, temporary exposure of the vessels 
to the circumambient fluid, and they are not gills, nor, 
being gills, do they become lungs by being forcibly 
driven back into the body — a really strange idea. Still, 
this makes no difference with our evolutionist. All 
species came from prior ones, therefore the fcetus bears 
the mark of gills — there is the proof! Instead of his 
having a proof of his theory, Darwin has only furnished 
a proof of the unscientific reasoning into which his pre- 
conceived theory has betrayed him.* 

* We had written the above, when, consulting a professor of standing, 
we learned what it never would have entered into our mind to suspect Dar- 
win of being ignorant of — that the most weighty physiologists and authori- 
ties in this matter have rejected entirely the theory of these arterial arches 
being gills, and therefore the name branchiae is a misnomer. They tell us 



202 



Darwin s Mistake. 



To cite one more instance of this precipitate way of 
drawing conclusions, we mention his argument drawn 
from rudiments. Now, we do not believe we risk any- 
thing in saying that no proof of transformation of species 
can be drawn from the existence of rudimentary bones, 
muscles, or organs. The type of animal life is more or less 
one. To sustain and develop it certain tissues have been 
created, and the beginning and growth of these tissues 
depend on life; they will not develop without life. 
What life is we shall see further on. The fact stands 
that life is what makes tissues begin, evolve, and per- 
fect themselves from inert matter. Take, says Dr. 
James, phosphate of lime. What more incapable of self- 
development as you look at it? Let life once begin its 
action, and forthwith you see the fish form from it its fins, 
marvelous in their beauty and adaptation ; the various 
animals their bones, hoofs, horns, claws ; man his body's 
frame of bone. Now, whatever tissues are needed for the 
body the mysterious agency of life takes, and the develop- 
ment of the tissues depends on the circumstances of the 
animal. They will be fully developed or rudimentary ac- 
cording to these circumstances. Accidental circumstances 
may cause hypertrophy, or fuller development, such as 

that from the very first the nutrition of the foetus is from the mother, 
through the filaments which mediately or immediately come in contact with 
her blood. Such is the teaching of Em, Bailly in the Dictionnaire de Mede- 
cine, etc., and also of A. Kolliker in his most valuable work on embryology. 
These writings are those of experts in the matters of science they treat of, 
and no one in the medical profession can gainsay the weight of their 
authority. What are we to say of Darwin, with such evidence on the 
other side, building up a most momentous theory with results of the very 
gravest import? It is certainly not the mark of wisdom to make grave as- 
sertions on the lightest foundation; and in this matter the part played by 
Charles Darwin is not happy, 



Darwiris Mistake. 



203 



irritation, which determines a flow of blood to the part, 
greater nutrition therefore, and growth of teeth, hair or 
bones, where only the possibility of their production ex- 
isted. On the other hand, quiet or disuse determines a 
less flow of blood, consequently less nutrition, less growth, 
atrophy or reduction to the condition of a rudiment. As 
all these tissues are more or less alike in all animals, it is 
to be expected that rudiments should exist, as not all ani- 
mals call their tissues into play equally. Nature seems 
to abound in precautions, so that these rudiments some- 
times come into play in a very curious and often very 
important manner. It is wonderful to see how nature 
will at once adapt itself to a changed condition, and what 
is rudimentary will not unfrequently, to compensate, 
develop fully in a most extraordinary way. Even in 
some of the prehistoric animals of vast proportions there 
are to be found teeth hidden in the gums, though the 
other teeth have not fallen out as yet. Darwin makes an 
excellent remark (p. 61, Descent of Maii)\ "I am con- 
vinced, from the light gained within the past few years, 
that very many structures that now appear to us useless, 
will hereafter be proved to be useful." We think we are 
justified in applying this remark to rudiments ; may not 
rudiments which are considered by his school to be use- 
less and only signs of descent from other species, be here- 
after proved to be providentially useful, at least in certain 
contingencies ? It seems to us exceedingly probable, and 
that therefore the argument from rudiments in favor of 
transformation of species is not only a weak one, but un- 
founded, a piece of mere conjecture.* 

* Darwin, p. 61, Descent of Man, acknowledges he "perhaps [in his 
Origin of Species prior to the fifth edition] attributed too much to the action 



204 



Darw ins M is take. 



The work of Dr. Constantine James, Moses and Dani'in, 
to which we have referred, is one of decided merit and 
bears evidence of great research. The writer is a French 
physician, and was formerly a co-worker and assistant of 
the celebrated Magendie, whose brilliant success in stu- 
dies of physiology and comparative anatomy gained him 
deservedly a world-wide reputation. His efforts are all 
devoted to showing the baseless nature of the theories of 
Darwin on the origin of species and on the descent of 
man. His work is accompanied by a brief of the late 
venerated pontiff, Pius IX., which is more than usually 
liberal in terms of commendation and of congratulation, 
as well as of condemnation of the absurd "dreams" 
which Dr. James undertakes to refute in the name of true 
science. Such words are grave and impressive, for they 
are not uttered at haphazard ; without being intended to 
contain any " infallible judgment," they are the words of 
authoritative decision based on the views of intelligent 
and learned men employed by the sovereign pontiff to 
expedite such letters for him ; and for this reason they 
mean a great deal. 

It is the fashion to look on anything English, and per- 
haps American, in the way of scientific investigation and 
critical judgment as of supereminent value, and to rank 
with these the Germans who agree with them. With all 

of natural selection or the survival of the fittest." He u did not formerly 
consider the existence of structures, which, as far as we can judge at present, 
are neither beneficial nor injurious; and this I believe to be one of the 
greatest oversights as yet detected in my work. I may be permitted to say, 
as some excuse, that I had two distinct objects in view: firstly to show 

THAT SPECIES HAD NOT BEEN SEPARATELY CREATED, AND, SECONDLY, THAT 
NATURAL SELECTION" HAD BEEN THE CHIEF AGENT OF CHANGE ! " Precon- 
ceived notions appear to have led to this result of unscientific reasoning. 



Darwin s Mistake. 



205 



due respect we beg to be regarded as not sharing this 
opinion. One of the reasons why we do not share it is 
because a clever Englishman has taught us otherwise. 
Something over two hundred years ago a learned and 
able English writer, Thirlby, who knew what he was 
saying, editing an edition of the works of St. Justin, 
martyr and philosopher, wrote as follows: " The 
art of judging and critically discerning the value of facts 
and of documents, of determining what is genuine and to 
be received, and what is false and to be rejected, is a most 
difficult one. Not many among us succeed in it. In 
France more have been successful. In Italy, where 
'fervescente sole coalescit ingenium' — the heat of the sun, 
that is, seems to force the intellect — those who have suc- 
ceeded are still more numerous." The two hundred 
years and more which have gone by since Thirlby wrote, 
have not changed the Italian mind. The Ausonian Pen- 
insula can boast of great writers still, of that calm and 
judicial temperament so valuable, yet so little appreciated 
except by the learned. At this moment there is no man 
in Europe who ranks higher in this respect than the dis- 
tinguished Roman, Giovanni Baptista De Rossi, whose 
word is listened to with the utmost deference by men of 
learning in all matters of antiquity requiring critical ex- 
amination. It is precisely this character of calmness, of 
exclusion of all preconceived notions, of weighing well all 
facts before coming to a conclusion, which distinguishes 
the real man of science from the superficial lecturer, half- 
learned and full of preconceived notions. The man who 
is to be trusted is the one who realizes the extent of 
what he does not know ; and only a truly learned man, 
one who has studied and appreciated the difficulties of 



206 



Darwin s Mistake. 



the matter he has in hand, can be said to belong to this 
category. Such a man can be relied on with confidence 
when he gives evidence of not being under the influence 
of a preconceived idea, than which no idol is more fatal 
to his usefulness. We have referred to an Italian as an 
example of the frame of mind so necessary for the dis- 
covery of truth. Among the French, also a Latin nation, 
we have Barthelemy de St. Hilaire, Quatrefages — both 
cited by James — and Pasteur and Moigno, men of world- 
wide reputation in their respective spheres. It strikes us 
as injudicious, therefore, to look only at the American or 
the English or the German side of a question, especially 
when in all those nations there is a larger contingent on 
the other side, and not to take into consideration what 
may be said by able men of France, of Italy, and of Spain, 
particularly when, in the judgment of a critical scholar of 
English nationality, those latter nations are especially 
prolific in that very kind of intellectual ability so useful 
and so necessary for the discovery of truth. 

Although the author of the book we have referred to 
indulges from time to time in the sarcasm and ridicule 
which, we must confess, spring naturally from such a 
theme as the learned English naturalist has made so 
prominent, Dr. Constantine James writes as a scholar and 
man of science, as he is. Thus, for example, page 249, 
he says : " Darwin establishes as the basis of his system 
that there is not only question of a simple modification 
of species, but of their radical transformation. Thus 
from the larva a fish is produced ; from a fish a reptile ; 
from a reptile a bird ; from a bird a mammal ; whence 
results the unheard-of phenomenon that each of these 
metamorphoses brings with it a complete renewal of 



Darwin s Mistake. 



207 



the solid and liquid parts. I said that the solid and 
liquid parts must be completely renewed. As for the 
solid parts, the thing is evident. It is enough to recall 
the fact that the bone and flesh of one animal differ 
essentially from the bone and flesh of another. The 
differences do not consist only in the disposition of the 
cellules and in the arrangement of the fibres ; the 
microscope reveals a difference in the woof, so to speak, 
of the organs. Every animal, therefore, to pass from 
one species to another, must perforce lose its proper 
material organization to take on that of the species 
into which it is transformed. So much for the solid 
parts. As for those that are liquid there is not less 
evidence. Let us take the blood, for example. It is 
well known that the blood is not a homogeneous fluid, 
but that it contains in suspension myriads of little 
bodies known as ' globules.' I could not give a better 
idea of them than by comparing them to the little 
golden flakes which float in the brandy of Dantzig. 
These globules are fitted, in volume and form, to the 
diameter of the extremely small vessels they must go 
through. Lenticular in men, elliptical in birds, ovoid 
in frogs, they vary according to the species. They will, 
therefore, vary each time the species changes. This 
enables us to understand why, in the operation of 
transfusion of blood recently again resorted to, there 
cannot be injected into the veins of a man any but 
human blood, under penalty of causing the gravest 
disorders in the circulation, owing to the stopping of 
the globules in the capillary vessels." We ask: Are 
we to accept such extraordinary changes and revolutions 
on the faith of a theorist who has not proved his theory ? 



208 



Darwin s Mistake. 



At page 253 Dr. James begins an interesting chap- 
ter on Hervey's celebrated axiom, 14 omne vivum ab 
ovo " — every living being comes from an egg. He 
continues: "But that egg, as long as it is only a germ, 
represents only a colorless globule, inert, and without 
determinate characteristics ; however skillful you may be 
in handling the microscope, you will never be able to 
distinguish the germ of a bird from that of a fish or 
from that of a mammal. From that period, the man- 
ner in which the organs gradually come out of a mass 
apparently homogeneous; the changes, the complica- 
tions, the relations, the functions which are established 
at every new phase ; the manner in which finally the 
young animal takes on his form and definitive struc- 
ture to become a new and independent being, prove 
that there is in the egg a very extraordinary some- 
thing which differs from its material composition, and 
which is very extraordinary in its nature, and is due 
to the pre-existing action of an organizing spirit. 
Whence we are to conclude that every animal bears in 
itself the principle of its own individuality." Or, to 
speak more clearly in the language of strict philoso- 
phy, every animal has a form — that is, a principle in 
virtue of which a thing is actually what it is. This 
form is the substantial form of St. Thomas. Thus a 
human body is a body in virtue of the substantial 
form, the soul, which it has. It is this soul which 
united to matter determines the development of that 
matter into what becomes the human body. This is 
the " breath of life "of a body ; this, with the devel- 
opment it determines, is life. Each animal and each 
organized living plant has its own form or deter- 



Darwin s Mistake. 



209 



mining simple essence, varying in grade of excel- 
lence till we come to what is called inert matter, 
which seems to act merely by general laws exte- 
rior to it or inherent in it — crystallization, endos- 
mosis, exosmosis, expansion or contraction, chemical 
combination or chemical decomposition. To matter 
thus acted on, without, power of self-movement, we 
may, by comparison with higher organizations, at- 
tribute a form, but the wording in this case, it seems to 
us, would be more figurative than exact. It is the First 
Cause which wills the laws in every instance ; but his 
action, if we may so speak, is more immediate in the case 
of inert matter than in the development of living, organ- 
ized matter, though that action in this latter case is of a 
nobler grade, requiring greater exercise of creative 
power, inasmuch as the form is created directly to make 
use of general laws and thus determine the development 
of the matter it needs to constitute with it a composite 
unity. To make a further application of this theory of 
forms, upon which depends the development of matter, 
we say that each animal has its own proper form, which 
is simple in its nature or essence, and not compound or 
material. This being so, this simple form or essence 
cannot change into another ; it either exists as it is or 
is annihilated, ceasing to exist at all. It follows, there- 
fore, that one species which owes its existence to its form 
cannot change into another ; but if a species essentially 
differing from another is to arise, a new form must be 
created. Whether this can be done by the new form 
being made to take on the qualities of a preceding form, 
plus what is in it distinctively essential, seems to be a 
disputed question, as we find some writers, who hold to 



2 IO 



Darwin s Mistake. 



revelation, referring to a possibility of a perfected species 
being raised to a higher grade by the creation of a higher 
form for it. Thus Professor St. George Mivart, in his 
recent article in the Catholic Quarterly, January number, 
1884, thinks it not untenable to teach that this actually 
took place with regard to man, and that, when the evo- 
lution of species had reached the desired perfection, the 
Creator infused the nobler form, the soul of man, into 
the species so perfected, and, doing it only to one pair, 
thus made the whole race of mankind of one man and of 
one woman. We confess, however, we are not convinced 
of the truth of the position ; for the facts we have already 
given — the absence of the missing link in the chain of 
development, the impossibility of breeding a different 
species from a pre-existing one, the sterility of hybrids, 
etc. — seem to us to make such a position very unsafe as 
a scientific theory. It is certainly simpler, safer, and, we 
think, sounder to say that a personal God, creating 
matter, gave it the forms he wished it to have ; and 
having first the noblest of all in his mind — that of man 
— made the other forms partake, in varied degree, of 
the excellence of that form, first in his intention, though 
ultimate in realization, beginning with the simpler form 
of animal life and by successive steps reaching the most 
complicated, that which immediately precedes man. In 
this theory there is no need of the missing bond of 
development, and the sterility of hybrids and of differing 
species among themselves is explained ; for in the case of 
communication between differing species the form is not 
created, while in the case of hybrids the action of the form 
is hampered by the physical state in which it finds itself, 
it being not* essentially but functionally rendered incom- 



Darwin s Mistake. 



2 I I 



petent to produce an animal organization like to its own, 
the reason being that the Creator has made no provision 
for such a state of things. 

In conclusion, we think it well to state that what we 
have written on the present subject we have given as a 
matter of individual opinion ; and we hereby disclaim 
any intention of representing any other than ourselves. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



XII. 



HERBERT SPENCER'S ENIGMA. 



{The Catholic World, August, 1885.) 



HE recent controversy in the Nineteenth Century and 



1 the Popular Science Monthly between Mr. Herbert 
Spencer and Mr. Frederick Harrison merits, not only 
from the character of the writers, but especially from 
the matter so carefully formulated by the first-named in 
his article, " Religion : A Retrospect and a Prospect," 
thoughtful and respectful consideration. To our mind he 
has done a decided service to the cause of religion. A 
man of vigorous thought, a writer of clearness and pre- 
cision, a teacher who has the courage of his convictions, 
and who utters them with the truthfulness and candor of 
one who is willing to risk everything for truth, whatever 
Mr. Herbert Spencer says will carry weight, and influence 
widely. Of course we differ with him ; we cannot for a 
moment admit his assertion of the impossibility of know- 
ing the existence and attributes of God after our limited 
but none the less sure way, and our reasons will appear 
in the sequel. We feel, moreover, that in his earnestness 
to uphold his theory, as put forth in the article we are 
reviewing, he has gone too far, according to his own 
rules of reasoning, and, overstepping the limits, has con- 
tradicted himself. He is very categoric in laying it down 




212 



Herbert Spencer s E?iigma. 



213 



as an axiom that man is conscious of a feeling in himself 
that leads him to believe in the existence of an Infinite 
and Eternal Energy which he cannot apprehend, of which 
he knows nothing, and which he therefore calls the Un- 
knowable. Yet, notwithstanding the assertion that it is 
unknowable, he proceeds to tell us something of what 
it is, and a good deal of what it is not. Thus, for ex- 
ample, he says : 

" The cruelty of a Fijian god, who, represented as devouring the 
souls of the dead, may be supposed to inflict torture during the proc- 
ess, is small compared with the cruelty of a god who condemns men 
to tortures which are eternal; and the ascription of this cruelty, 
though habitual in ecclesiastical formulas, occasionally occurring in 
sermons, and still sometimes pictorially illustrated, is becoming so 
intolerable to the better-natured that, while some theologians dis- 
tinctly deny it, others quietly drop it out of their teachings. Clearly 
this change cannot cease until the belief in hell and damnation dis- 
appear. Disappearance of them will be aided by an increasing 
repugnance to injustice. The visiting on Adam's descendants, 
through hundreds of generations, dreadful penalties for a small 
transgression which they did not commit : the damning of all men 
who do not avail themselves of an alleged mode of obtaining forgive- 
ness which most men never heard of: and the effecting a reconcilia- 
tion by sacrificing a son, who was perfectly innocent, to satisfy the 
assumed necessity for a propitiatory victim — are modes of action 
which, ascribed to a human ruler, would call forth expressions of 
abhorrence ; and the ascription of them to the Ultimate Cause of 
things, even now felt to be full of difficulties, must become im- 
possible.' 1 

Here we are told that the Unknowable is the Ultimate 
Cause of all things, and that it cannot by any possibility 
have acted as he supposes the Christian religion teaches 
God has acted and does. Mr. Herbert Spencer's philos- 
ophy is at fault. He starts with a false principle. It is 



214 



Herbert Spencer s Enigma. 



only another illustration of the old saying : Causa mala 
patrocinio pejor erit. And yet we are far from calling 
his a bad cause. There is too much of good in it to be 
spoken of in that way. It is bad by defect ; what is in it 
is good, though that good be but twilight, a glimmer of 
truth. The good consists in this, that he teaches, with- 
out subterfuge of any kind, the existence of an Ultimate 
Cause, of an Infinite, Eternal Energy ; the bad, or the 
defect, is that he pretends we can know nothing about 
it, and that the only progress in the appreciation of this 
great Being will consist in a far greater increased con- 
sciousness of the belief that it is. What is still farther 
good in his theory is that this consciousness cannot be 
destroyed, as it belongs to nature ; but, on the contrary, 
will go on, becoming ever more stable and constituting 
the essence of all religion. To use other words, this is 
the testimony of nature, of which Tertullian and others 
spoke long ago ; and we may exclaim of Mr. Herbert 
Spencer: "Testimony of a soul naturally Christian! " 

To us, to whom the explanation is so simple, it must ap- 
pear surprising that this well-informed writer should speak 
so lightly of the language of Holy writ where it treats of God 
in the speech of men. With the knowledge that we must 
use material expressions to signify our internal intellec- 
tual and spiritual operations, our thoughts and feelings, 
how can any one be surprised that in writing of God and 
of his operations, so far above our limited comprehension, 
the inspired author should have used terms easily under- 
stood by those for whom he was writing, and who cer- 
tainly would not have understood him had he used recon- 
dite phrases and words known only to himself? We 
should have thought a moment's reflection, with the light 



Herbert Spencer s Enigma. 



of common sense, would have prevented such a mistake 
as Mr. Herbert Spencer has made here. We could ex- 
pect this from a Robert Ingersoll, but from Herbert 
Spencer we did not expect it. If he has ever given any 
attention to the theology he combats, such as every fair- 
minded man ought to give to theories he impugns, he 
must know that Catholic theologians teach that such ex- 
pressions as he objects to' are only figurative, while re- 
ferring to acts which, among men, are accompanied with 
the phases of thought and feeling described by the writer 
of the inspired text. God is said to be angry, to repent, 
to be glad, etc. These are our ways of speaking. He 
himself is unchangeable ; seeing and knowing all possi- 
bilities from the beginning, he cannot be subject to the 
changes such possibilities would produce on one who had 
not foreseen them. But the actions of God have the se- 
quence they would have had, had he been capable of the 
emotions described, while all the result the actions of men 
could have on God is coeval with the eternal act whereby 
God willed creation and ordered his providence ; for, in 
his eternal foresight, he knows all things past, present, 
future, or possible ; nothing can escape him who willed all 
and made all things what they are. 

Another false view we must comment on is the one 
which causes Mr. Herbert Spencer to stigmatize the 
wording of Scripture where God is spokon of as re- 
quiring the praise of man. It is strange that the ob- 
vious distinction between the Creator and the creature 
should have escaped so acute a thinker. The inspired 
writer says, speaking in the name of God : In gloriam 
meam feci eum [i.e., homineui\ — " I have made him 
[manj for my glory," Mr. Spencer rightly condemns 



216 Herbert Spencer's Enigma. 



self-glorifying in a man ; and then he goes wide of the 
mark by applying the same rule to God, forgetting that 
the reason why man does wrong in glorifying himself 
is because all he has he has received of God, and all 
the glory, therefore, belongs to God and not to him- 
self, who can do nothing without God. Justice requires 
that glory be given to him to whom it is due. God, 
being infinitely just, as we shall see, must exact that 
glory for himself, all the more because he must correct 
the continued tendency of man to prevaricate in this 
regard. Again, God must act for an end worthy of 
himself, and he can have, therefore, no end but himself, 
as nothing worthy of him exists outside of himself, for 
only an infinite end can be worthy of infinite action. 
God must hate the robbery of his glory by man, and 
must teach man to repair the disorder of which he has 
been guilty in attributing to himself any honor whatso- 
ever. St. Augustine, in his book of Retractations, tells 
us how he made the mistake of attributing to himself 
the first steps in conversion, and how he was corrected 
by reading the commentary of St. Cyprian on the words 
of St Paul : " What hast thou that thou hast not re- 
ceived , and if thou hast received it, why dost thou 
glory as if thou hadst not received it ? " The same 
may be said of every gift, even physical , and there- 
fore all the glory belongs to God, and he would fail in 
justice if he did not bid all men give it to him. 

A somewhat similar error Mr. Herbert Spencer falls 
into where he speaks of the Divine Intelligence, or in- 
telligence ascribed to God. He gives us an argument, 
subtle but faulty, to show that the First Cause could 
not have been intelligent, as we understand the word, 



Herbert Spencers Enigma. 217 



because this intelligence is dependent on alien activi- 
ties — " the impressions generated by things beyond con- 
sciousness, and the ideas derived from such impressions." 
Now, intelligence is the exercise of the intellectual 
faculty on ideas, it really makes no difference how they 
come. They may come from consciousness or from 
outside, or they may so be in the mind as to be identi- 
fied with it. The recognition of one's being and rela- 
tion with others is itself an act of the intellect, an act 
of intelligence. The First Cause, therefore, could be 
intelligent at least in this way. But this is only to 
answer the argument. The real fact is that the First 
Cause, being first in order, must be also first in the in- 
tellectual order and possess it most perfectly ; and as 
the perfection of intelligence is to understand the Infinite, 
so this First Cause must understand itself, all its possi- 
bilities which it sees in itself viewed, as it were, ma- 
terially, these possibilities being the archetypes accord- 
ing to which things come to exist in the actual order. 

To come, however, to the fuller and more direct 
reply to the assertion that the First Cause is un- 
knowable, the profession of belief in the existence 
of an Infinite and Eternal Energy frees us from 
the necessity of proving this existence. We see that Mr. 
Herbert Spencer, by a different process perhaps, and in 
a different degree, is in harmony with the assertion of 
St. Paul, quoted by the Vatican Council, that man's 
mind can attain to the knowledge that there is a God. 
But St. Paul goes further, and so do other texts of 
Holy Writ, the writers being more logical than our 
author, and not under the baneful influence of nine- 
teenth-century unbelief. Once grant the existence of a 



218 



Herbert Spencer s Enigma. 



First Cause, and reason recognizes it as infinite, and 
must do so, because it could not be limited, as it is 
the First, and it would be absurd to say it limited 
itself. This infinitude cannot be considered a mere 
name ; it implies no limit of any attribute compatible 
with it, and it must, in fact, be infinite Reality, in 
which everything is in itself or as possible, and without 
which nothing can be. It must be, therefore, infinite 
truth, infinite goodness, infinite perfection, infinite power, 
infinite energy or will. Whatever is must first have 
existed as an object of that divine, infinite intellect 
from the beginning ; for no one can give what he has 
not, and beings must, therefore, have received what 
they have from a Cause which first had what it has 
given them. Consequently reason shows us that the 
First Cause, whom we call God, has in him Infinite 
Intelligence ; he is the pure act of Intellect whereby 
he understands himself and all he is able to do — in a 
word, all possibility. 

Again, reason teaches us that the First Cause must 
be Truth itself, all that which is in any way, as ex- 
plained above. Therefore it excludes all error or falsity 
in this First Cause. And as it, moreover, recognizes 
in God infinite perfection, it excludes from him all un- 
truthfulness, and all derogation from the moral law 
which is indeliby stamped on our mind and heart. 
The doctor of grace, St. Augustine, quotes the words 
of the Psalmist, " Who shall show unto us what is 
good ? " and he answers with the words that follow, 
" The light of thy countenance is stamped upon us." 
This law first is in God and then exists by participa- 
tion in man ; and, as we have said, it could not be in 



Herbert Spencers Enigma. 219 



man if ir were not in the First Cause, on the principle 
that no one gives what he has not. The eternal fitness 
of the ideas of the Divine Intellect constitute this moral 
law which is natural to man, and found in him, in its 
essence, everywhere. 

In like manner reason recognizes personality in the 
First Cause, being the principle which makes a rational 
being the adequate source of his own operations and 
responsible for them. This noble prerogative is what 
makes man eminently worthy of respect, like unto his 
Maker, and merits for him the grade he holds in the 
esteem of his fellow-men. All society is based on the 
fact that man is a person. It comes into play every- 
where, in daily life, in business, in the law-courts, in 
the Patent Office, where a man is awarded a right of 
property in an invention because it is his own, from 
him as a person. To pretend that man could possess 
such a noble and eminent and perfect quality, and that 
the First Cause from whom he comes has it not, were 
to do outrage to reason. 

Reason can know more. It can know that this infin- 
itely good First Cause cannot irresistibly lead man into 
error, and that, therefore, when man makes use of 
every proper means of becoming certain, he can arrive 
at the knowledge of truth to the extent it may please 
this First Cause to manifest it him, by ordinary or 
extraordinary means. It makes him realize, too, that 
the Infinite and Eternal Energy, being all-powerful, can 
maintain the physical laws, or alter or suspend them ; 
and therefore it recognizes the possibility of miracles, 
of which man judges surely by the use of the laws of 
evidence. And when he sees miracles used as a testi- 



220 



Herbert Spencer s Enigma. 



mony to the truth of teaching he recognizes that teach- 
ing as of God. Reason, therefore, declares its belief in 
the possibility of revelation. 

To sum up. So far from man not being able to 
know what God is, so far from declaring the First 
Cause Unknowable, reason can know God ; know that 
he is ; that he is infinite ; that he is perfect ; that he 
is intellect itself; that he is goodness itself and justice 
itself ; that he is the author of all that is, the Sovereign 
Personality who has made man after his own image ; 
that he is morality itself, and the source of the moral 
law in man ; that he can make known his mind to 
men, cause men to recognize him as speaking, by signs 
of his omnipotence we call miracles, and oblige men to 
accept the truths which constitute a revelation. 

We have not given special attention to the argu- 
ments of Mr. Frederick Harrison. Materialism is so 
gross that it is not likely to hold long-continued sway 
over the minds of any large body of men. It is un- 
fortunate that this form of error should have taken 
such hold on the minds of physicians especially. They 
are so much wrapt up in matter, and see so many 
strange and interesting phenomena of reflex action, that 
they come to regard matter as the only thing that is, 
and the source of all activity. Were things as they 
should be, theology would hold the first place in a man's 
estimation, law the next, then physical science. But the 
theologians, so-called, have rejected divine or church au- 
thority and given their own comments, and therefore have 
lost immensely in public opinion ; lawyers, by substituting 
expediency for justice, or because they have to take the 
ignorant legislation of semi-cultured bodies as the law 



Herbert Spencer s Enigma. 



221 



they interpret and apply, share the same fate, and are 
not in the esteem they should naturally have as a pro- 
fession. The people remember the words of Scripture, 
" Honor the physician on account of your need," and, 
as that need comes often, the physician is considered as 
more important than the minister or lawyer, while the 
brilliant discoveries of the profession dazzle the public 
eye. Those, too, who share the opinions of Mr. Harrison 
are apt to look on the physician as the high-priest of 
humanity, and hence make him share in the cult they 
pay it. Certainly the physician who does his duty, who 
is faithful to God and to man, is a noble being and a 
most powerful agent for good, not alone for the health of 
the body, but for the social weal. Such a man every one 
will willingly honor, and we should be the last to detract 
from his merit But the physician who has given up 
God, and especially the materialist, has no code of 
morality but his own ideas, and is therefore a dangerous 
man, liable at any moment to do, perhaps in invincible 
ignorance, the greatest ill. We remember in our young 
days meeting with one of these physicians, who had not 
the fear of God before his eyes. He was speaking before 
several, we being of the number, of his treating a young 
woman for some ailment, and told us he had for this 
purpose given her to read works of an immoral 
character. That incident has never been blotted out 
from our memory, and the thought of this physician 
comes up always as of one who was a traitor to a noble 
profession. The only safety there is for society is the 
moral law; and without belief in God and in his revela- 
tion, which confirms and sanctions the moral law, that 
law loses its hold on men and untold evil will be the 



222 



Herbert Spencer s Enigma. 



result, Mr. Herbert Spencer's belief in an Ultimate 
Cause which is an Eternal, Infinite Energy, goes far to 
safeguard the natural law ; but we hope and pray that 
his earnest and manly truthfulness will be rewarded by a 
still greater knowledge — the knowledge which surpasses 
all earthly knowledge and which so satisfies man's yearn- 
ings. When that time comes he will experience some- 
thing of the joy and happiness that fill the heart of 
those who have found the truth. One of these, formerly 
a prominent writer on the infidel press of Paris, afterwards 
a doughty champion of the faith of Christ — Louis Veuil- 
lot — thus speaks of his feelings : " I was ruined the day 
I dropped from the clouds. But it is God who ruined 
me, blessed be His mercy ! These clouds concealed the 
lightning ; it lit up when mercy dissipated them. I 
have seen heaven, and in my dust I am heir to a kingdom 
that will never perish. Formerly, to my eyes, all was 
but the splendid decoration of vast emptiness unfathom- 
able ; the delightful sound of an ingenius mechanism put 
up by a fantastic workman, who without saying why, 
had withdrawn from his work. At present all is clear ; 
at present I see, I hear, I know. The smiles and the 
sounds of nature are a language I understand; my heart 
answers it with a beat that tells of brotherly love. I 
know why the hills are clothed with joyousness, why the 
seed rejoices in the earth, why a song of praise comes up 
from the valleys, why the little stream leaps and claps its 
hands. I know this, and my voice, uniting itself with 
those voices that are never silent, has begun to chant an 
eternal hosanna." 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



XIII. 



THE ENCYCLICAL " IMMORTALE DEI." 



{American Catholic Quarterly Review, January, 1886.) 

HERE never, perhaps, was a time when clearness of 



1 ideas was more demanded among Christian nations 
than at the present day. Protestantism, which, as its 
name imports, is a rebellion against God's church, and 
as His Eminence Cardinal Newman has observed, can 
maintain its position only by asserting that the church of 
Rome has gone astray, set up its tribunal of private judg- 
ment. That tribunal has called before it every question, 
religious or moral, with the result of a confusion such that 
the most ordinary and obvious truths are misapplied, dis- 
torted, or rejected, while the most pernicious theories of 
religion and morality are working havoc among our poor 
misguided fellow-men. It is no wonder this has oc- 
curred. At best, as the sacred writer has said : " The 
thoughts of mortals are timid, and our foresight uncer- 
tain (Wisdom ix., 14). When men deliberately stray 
away from the fount of living waters, and from the source 
of truth, they must expect the natural result. Reason, 
always of its nature liable to err, will then find itself irre- 
sistibly driven to conclusions the folly of which will be 
shown by the practical results. In the midst of the up- 
heaval of society at this epoch, when the masses rise up 




224 The Encyclical " Immortale Dei." 

against legitimate authority, class is arrayed against class, 
the most sacred duties are disavowed, and - the most 
tender and delicate ties are sundered and the family made 
desolate, what a blessing to have speak to the world one 
whose thoughts are not timid, and who, like his Divine 
Master, gives forth his utterances " as one having author- 
ity !" The Encyclical " Immortale Dei," dated All 
Saints' Day, of the year 1885, is a boon to the world. 
Not since the Vatican Council has a more important 
document issued from the pen of the sovereign pontiff. 
Non-Catholics as well as Catholics recognize its truth, its 
wisdom, its opportuneness, and its eminently practical 
utility. The liberal press of Vienna was, we believe, the 
first to style it " The Covenant between Church and So- 
ciety." Of course, these journals must have their say, 
and they, therefore, here and there make their reserva- 
tions ; but those reservations are made lest their expres- 
sions of admiration should lead their readers to infer they 
were about to surrender to the pope. The London 
Tablet has published a number of extracts from the news- 
papers of the Continent to show in what esteem the 
Encyclical is held by those opposed to the church. As 
is to be expected, the journals edited by those not of the 
faith make objection according to their peculiar opinions ; 
but it would be an interesting work to show how, while 
they do this, the greater number would be found on the 
side of nearly if not every teaching of the Encyclical. 
The reason is obvious when we come to review briefly 
the document in detail. 

In a style classic and easy to understand, even by 
those not used to theological treatment of religious or 
moral questions, our most Holy Father, Pope Leo XIII., 



The Encyclical " Immortale Dei." 225 

comes to the aid of society, and lays down the Catholic 
doctrine of social life familiar to a Catholic ear, but hav- 
ing a strange sound to the world which habitually refuses 
a hearing to the Catholic side. The commanding posi- 
tion of the sovereign pontiff, however, compels attention, 
while his personal worth exacts homage even from the 
proudest men of culture. The effect, therefore, of this 
Encyclical is apt to be very far-reaching, and it would be 
a panacea of social ill, were it not that too many of the 
class Holy Writ tells of, nolunt intelligere tit bene agant, 
do not wish to understand, because they do not want to 
do what is right. 

The first point the pope speaks of is civil society and 
authority. We feel it is a pity to curtail these extracts, 
but the limits of a short article do not permit anything 
else. In his preamble he says : " No more excellent a 
manner of establishing and governing a state has been 
found than that which of its own accord springs from the 
teaching of the Gospel." How true ! Christian charity 
is the true political economy. The laws of commerce, 
demand and supply, increase, population, poverty and 
wealth, would all be the more solid and less liable to 
error or variation were charity their basis ; while the 
stability of the state founded on the Christian idea of 
authority would guarantee also the firmness of law of 
whatever nature. 

Authority, the pope tells us, is from God. Listen to 
his words : " It is in the very nature of man that he live 
in society, since he cannot obtain in solitude the neces- 
sary culture and ornament of life, and likewise perfection 
of mind and soul, it has been divinely provided that he 
should be born for the society and intercourse of men, 



226 The Encyclical " Immortale Dei." 



as well domestic as civil, which alone can supply the per- 
fect sufficiency of life. Inasmuch, however, as no society 
can exist unless there be some one to preside over the 
rest, moving each one by an efficacious and like impulse 
to the common end, it results that authority by which the 
civil community of men is governed is necessary ; which, 
not otherwise than society itself, comes from nature and, 
therefore, from God. From this it follows that public 
authority in itself is only from God. God alone is the 
most true and greatest Lord of all, to whom everything 
that is belongs, and whom all must serve, so that whoever 
have the right to command receive it from no other 
source but from God, the sovereign prince of all.'' 
"There is no authority save from God.'* How wonder- 
fully clear and logical all this is ! What dignity it gives 
to human society and government ! How it safeguards 
authority, and puts an obligation on every human being 
to obey the law ! The whole of this part of the Ency- 
clical is replete with wisdom, and condenses in a most 
cogent manner the sayings of the wisest and best men of 
Christianity. The pope declares that no special form of 
government is essential, but that may be taken which 
fitly secures the common utility and welfare. This, be it 
understood, must be done with order and with no viola- 
tion of right. The pope is no partisan of revolution. He 
says that those exercising authority must act as the min- 
isters of God, and with paternal charity ; to act otherwise 
is to be a tyrant, for authority is for the common good, 
and not for the personal benefit of the ruler. On the 
other hand, those subject to authority must obey. These 
are his words : " To despise legitimate authority, in what- 
soever person it be, is no more allowable than to resist 



The Encyclical " Immortale Dei." 227 



the will of God;" which, if any resist, they go to ruin of 
their own choosing: "Whoso resists authority, resists the 
ordination of God ; those who resist, purchase to them- 
selves damnation " (Romans xiii., v. 2). This official 
teaching of the pope is a pledge to our country of the 
good which will come to it from the Catholic Church. 
We have the republican form of government, established in 
a proper, orderly manner, and as Dr. J. Gilmary Shea has 
ably shown, by the cordial and unanimous cooperation of 
Catholics, from the soldiers of " Congress' Own" to the 
distinguished signer of the Declaration of Independence, 
Charles Carroll, of Carrollton, and to Jesuit Father John 
Carroll, afterwards the first Archbishop of Baltimore. 
Every Catholic, the pope declares, must obey that gov- 
ernment. As a consequence the Catholic Church will be 
found to be the most effective bulwark of American free- 
dom, and of individual rights. Nor need our good fellow- 
countrymen, bred up in the false ideas of their various 
creeds, in dread and dislike of Catholicity, fear encroach- 
ments on their rights of conscience ; for further on the sov- 
ereign pontiff not only states that princes can tolerate in 
their dominions, for just reasons, a difference of faith, but 
also asserts that the church is wont to see that no one be 
compelled to believe against his will, quoting St. Augus- 
tine, when he says: "No one can believe except by an 
act of his will." This act of the will we know is an 
elicited act, and cannot be forced ; otherwise a man 
would will and not will at the same time the same 
thing, which is absurd. As for just reasons to tolerate 
difference of opinion on matters of faith, surely no juster 
reasons can exist than here among us, where those who 
differ with us do so in the best of good faith. They will 



228 



The Encyclical "Immortale.Dei" 



always find us good neighbors and friends, and loyal to 
the words of the Holy Father which we have just cited. 
But while the pope speaks thus with Christian charity, 
that same Christian charity makes him condemn in out- 
spoken language, for which we are sincerely grateful to 
him, the doctrine that the choice of one's religion is a 
matter of indifference ; that the various creeds are on an 
equal footing, and equally safe. He proclaims that only 
one is the true and safe one, that of the Holy Roman 
and Apostolic Church ; that all are bound to seek in it 
the means of salvation, and, therefore, to respect and 
cherish it. 

Passing from the consideration of authority in the state 
and in the church, and of the good that comes from 
their mutual good feeling and agreement, the pope 
comes to the serious question of revolution as advocated 
by the secret societies of the present day, and condemns 
it as it has always been condemned by the church. 
And here let us remark, that the secret organization of 
Masonry, the chief expounder and actor in the propaga- 
tion of revolutionary ideas in Europe, is entirely out of 
place in this country and unpatriotic, a menace to our 
institutions if it were to succeed in spreading its doctrines 
among us. Americans do not need any dark-lantern 
work. Let the children of darkness go whence they 
came, to their place of birth in Europe ; they are out of 
place here. We want education and light, the more the 
better ; not the education which Freemasonry gives 
without God, but the truth which comes from God, 
whose light illumes it through the fostering care of His 
church. The head of that church speaks in unmistak- 
able terms of revolutionary principles. He quotes the 



The Encyclical " Immortale Dei." 229 

documents on this subject given to the world by his 
predecessors, confirms them, and then sums up. " From 
these prescriptions of the pontiffs the following are to 
be by all means understood : that the origin of public 
power is to be sought in God Himself, and not in the 
multitude or people ; that the license of sedition (revolu- 
tion) is repugnant to reason ; that it is wrong in men, 
and wrong in states, to give no place to the duties of 
religion, or to look on all religions in the same manner ; 
that immoderate power to think and publish one's 
thoughts is not the right of any citizen, nor is it to be 
classed among those things that merit favor and patron- 
age. In like manner it must be understood that the 
church is a society, not less than the state itself, perfect 
in kind and right." 

We have referred sufficiently to the first two points of 
this last passage. The remainder of this article will 
refer to what the pope says about the church in its rela- 
tion to the state. Once grant that the church as well 
as the state is from God ; that the church has her 
authority directly from God, given to the Apostles and 
their successors, so that those who hear them hear Him, 
that this authority is abiding in the church now as on 
the Day of Pentecost, and no sane man can avoid seeing 
that both these societies, the state and the church, are 
independent, the one of the other, each in its sphere ; 
but that the state which is constituted for the material 
order must be second and subordinate to the church in 
what relates to the spiritual condition of men, for which 
Christ constituted the church. So evident is this that 
the " reformers," who found they had to depend on the 
rulers of states they were in, invented a hitherto strange 



230 The Encyclical " Immortale Dei." 



doctrine, that religion belonged to the one who ruled 
the land, cujus regio illius religio. Professor Schaff, in a 
recent article in the North American Review, deservedly 
and unmercifully scores the slavish condescension of these 
men who pretended to preach liberty of opinion. They 
not only made man the slave of kingly power, but en- 
slaved his soul too ! And so, while the iron heel of the 
European despotism was stamping out the true faith of 
Christ from the hearts of poor, simple people, the minister 
stood by and applauded and bade the people accept 
what the prince said they must believe. Degradation 
of humanity ! Was this the conduct of the popes, and 
bishops, and priests, and martyrs of the early Christian 
centuries ? No ! They gave the people the example of 
dying for the faith, and bade them die for it. They 
followed the example of the Apostles, who said : " We 
ought to obey God rather than men " (Acts v., 29). In 
this Encyclical the pope lays down the law given by 
Christ: "Give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's; 
but to God the things that are God's." There is no fear 
of the church trying to usurp the rights of the state. 
History shows that the danger is just the other way. 
The calumny of her enemies has blackened the fair fame 
of Christ's spouse, who must always defend His interests, 
and bear the consequences, persecution and calumny. 
That many questions arise in which the two orders, the 
civil and religious, meet, comes necessarily from the fact 
that man has a soul, first subject to God, and then to the 
state. Those questions, as the pope ably intimates, can 
be met by agreements which accurately determine the 
relations of each order, known as concordats. Where 
these are observed, there is no danger of any clash. That 



The Encyclical " Immortale Dei." 231 

such agreements will be needed in this country, where the 
church enjoys the fullest liberty, is not at all likely. It 
is far more likely that the state, in the possible troubles 
which may result from the too unrestricted importation of 
the refuse of Europe, and extension of the right of 
suffrage, may have to call on the church to keep her 
simple people from the delusions of socialism abroad in 
the land, brought hither by those who learned such 
principles in the countries that have cast off the " yoke 
of Rome," or turned a deaf ear to the counsels of the 
church. It is such doctrines as these, atheistical litera- 
ture eminently destructive of society, and such publica- 
tions as Mr. Comstock so meritoriously wars against, 
which make Pope Leo XIII. condemn the unbridled 
liberty of the pen, and society should thank him for 
what he has done. 



i 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



XIV. 



TENURE OF LAND AND EMINENT DOMAIN. 



{Read before the Leo7ihie Union of Indianapolis, Oct. 7, 1S87.) 

OU have been good enough, my dear friends, to 



I invite me to address you this evening, and, on 
my part, there is a sincere desire to meet your ex- 
pectations to the extent of my ability. In casting about 
for a subject, I have thought I should meet your wishes 
by saying something that would not only interest, but 
give instruction on some question of our day regarding 
which it is important to have exact ideas. It was not 
difficult to find such a subject, as a variety of topics 
are nowadays discussed of a very serious and of a very 
practical character. The change that is working in the 
world from the old order to the new, from the state ot 
tutelage, in which the mass of the people have been in 
all countries, to the individual freedom which exists 
among us here, and is gradually coming into existence 
or increasing in all civilized nations, is continually bring- 
ing ideas to the front which have to be examined and 
pronounced upon. This begets great activity of mind 
and a great strife of opinion, which has its advantages, 
if there be temporary disadvantages. We are not afraid 
of the use of reason. Reason is God-given, and, like 




Tenure of Land. 



233 



everything that comes from God, it leads to God if 
rightly used. There is hardly a more interesting passage 
in the acts of the Plenary Council of the Vatican than 
the IVth Chapter of the Dogmatic Constitution on Faith 
and Reason, approved in the Hid Solemn Session. In 
this the Ven. Fathers of the Council and the Sovereign 
Pontiff speak nobly of reason. They recognize it as 
a source and order of knowledge ; declare it, with St. 
Paul, to be able to arrive at the knowledge of God ; 
deny that there can ever be any real dissension between 
faith and reason, as God, who gives faith, gave the 
light of reason to the mind of man. They further 
affirm that faith and reason mutually aid each other, 
since right reason demonstrates the foundations of 
faith. We are therefore justified in trusting to the use 
of reason, though, happily, we acknowledge a still 
higher tribunal, that of revealed truth which comes 
from God and which is in the keeping of that church 
in which dwells the Paraclete promised and sent by its 
Divine Founder. With the light that revealed truth 
sheds, the defects of reason are remedied, and the path 
is so illumined as to make mistake impossible. By the 
use of both these concordant means of knowledge, we 
can safely take in hand any question. 

The subject I have selected for your consideration 
to-night is one which, from the intense interest it has 
lately and still excites, might almost cause one to hesi- 
tate treating it. But I have, nevertheless, come to the 
conclusion to speak of it, because I know your desire 
for precise information, and have, in common with you, 
seen the false notions which have been spread before 
the public that show a want of understanding of what 



234 



Tenure of Land 



is essential ; while, moreover, these false notions, having 
a very practical bearing, menace the foundations of 
social order. And as you, gentlemen of the Leonine 
Union, have for your purpose the furthering of social 
science among us, and inscribe upon your banner fidel- 
ity to the teachings of the church and its head, whose 
name honors you, I therefore crave your courteous at- 
tention, and that of the guests who have honored us on 
this occasion, while I discuss the question of the Tenure 
of Land and the relation with it of what is known as 
Eminent Domain. 

How land came to be held as private property might 
seem a very plain and a very obvious matter, as it cer- 
tainly does to those who, with a simple and unpreju- 
diced mind, look at things as they are. But not all 
are such simple and unprejudiced persons. Early edu- 
cation, surroundings, the influence of theorists, have their 
weight in drawing one from the way of correct judg- 
ment ; while there are others to whom the retort may be 
addressed: " Much learning doth make thee mad." The 
words, too, of St. Paul (I. Tim., ch. 3, v. 7), in this con- 
nection, occur to the mind ; for these persons are " ever 
learning, and never attaining to the knowledge of the 
truth." But if the matter is so obvious, how is it that 
writers and speakers have gone astray ? 

It is an easy stumbling-block in the path of those who 
are wayward, that, primarily, God made the earth and 
gave it to the children of men in common ; and that the 
natural law contains no dictate which says that land shall 
be held in one way more than in another. The theme, 
consequently, suggests itself to a philanthropist of fanci- 
ful mood and of unpractical ways, how shall land best 



and Eminent Domain, 



2.35 



be held, in common or otherwise ? and he decides that 
it is far better that it be held as it was originally given, 
in common. From that to the condemnation of those 
who defend individual ownership of land the passage is 
easy. Then the historical student goes to work to in- 
vestigate how, from the land being common property, 
it came to be possessed as private property. He goes 
back till he comes to the dawn of civilization, or to the 
days of barbarism, and he hunts for the germs of the 
idea of individual possession, and on his researches others 
may base their theories on the subject. Thus, in his 
Constitutional History of England, Professor Stubbs, of 
Oxford, goes to Germany and investigates the manners 
and customs of the Saxons and other tribes who con- 
tributed their quota to the invasion and conquest of Eng- 
land. It is interesting to hear what he says, for it is 
from England, the mother country, that our own com- 
mon law, which regulates this question of land tenure, 
has come ; though, as I shall have occasion to develop, the 
idea of holding from the crown or the state, which, it ap - 
pears, underlies the system, is rather a fictio juris, a fiction 
of the law, and, at all events, merely an accidental mode 
of tenure, and by no means from the essence of 
things. 

I would premise, lest there should be misunderstand- 
ing, that Professor Stubbs, to my knowledge, nowhere 
argues in favor of holding land in common. But he quotes 
ancient writers to show what was the original custom 
among the Saxons. On page 19 of vol. L, after speak- 
ing of the writings of Julius Caesar, he quotes the historian 
Tacitus saying that " possessions of land are held by all, 
by turn — that is, in common, which they presently divide 



236 



Tenure of Land 



up according to the rank or dignity of the cultivators. v# 
Commenting on this passage, Prof. Stubbs goes on to say 
it is evident there were classes among the early Germans — 
the noble, the well-born, the freedmen, and the slaves. 
" But," he adds, " the inequalities in the use or possession 
of land involve no inequalities in social or political rights." 
These tribes, therefore, seem to have held their possessions 
originally in common, and to have divided them up annu- 
ally, or periodically, according to the importance or need of 
those who cultivated them, on the principle that those who 
had greater need on account of their flocks, or greater merit 
in defending the country, should be more bountifully pro- 
vided for ; which, I think, all will look upon as a begin- 
ning of that unavoidable inequality in the distribution of 
wealth which always and everywhere manifests itself 
among men. Further, on page 23, the professor tells us 
that the slaves paid rent, which shows that even this tenure 
in common had its modification. Speaking of the gradual 
change from possession in common to that of the individ- 
ual, Professor Stubbs goes on : " Without conjecturing 
how the change took place, we may safely assume that, 
although traces still remain of a common land tenure at 
the opening of Anglo-Saxon history, absolute ownership 
of land in severalty was established and becoming the rule. 
We may, then, regard the land as referable to two great 
divisions : that which was held by individuals in full own- 
ership, and that of which the ownership was in the state." 
The former, because recorded, was called " bookland ; " 
the latter was known as " folcland" or public land. 

* (l Agri pro nuraero cultorum ab universis iu vices (al. in vicis) occu- 
pantur, quos mox inter se secundum dignationem partiuntur."' Dr. Waitz 
contends for in vicis. 



and Eminent Domain. 237 



We come now to the period in which the feudal system 
prevails and still further modifies the tenure of land. 
This system came from the peoples that invaded the 
Roman empire, and was founded on conquest. The 
conqueror allotted the land to whom he pleased, and 
the holder held his possession or feud from his sovereign, 
the donor. Blackstone, on the Rights of Things, book 
II., ch. I, pp. 45-46 (Sharswood's edition, 1875), says 
on this subject, allotments of this nature <c all sprang 
from the same right of conquest." Professor Stubbs, 
referring to the Germans (vol. I., p. 35), remarks: " The 
military princeps has but to conquer and colonize a new 
territory, and reward his followers, on a plan that will 
keep them faithful, as well as free, and feudalism springs 
into existence" 

From what has been said it is evident, first, that the 
possession of land in common, where it existed, was 
found to be impracticable on a large scale and in need 
of modification ; and it finally gave way to individual 
ownership : and, secondly, that the feudal system, in 
which all hold from the sovereign, is an artificial con- 
dition of tenure. Possession in common, therefore, being 
impracticable, and the possession by the sovereign of all 
land being a forced and not natural condition, it would 
follow, it seems, that neither possession in common nor 
the feudal system is according to nature, that is, accord- 
ing to what reason demands, although not contrary to 
reason. 

What will our reason teach on this subject ? What will 
the study of the essence of things make us understand ? 

Let us consult the masters to whom the world looks 
for guidance, and hear what they have to say. 



2 3 8 



Tenure of Land 



A great lawyer, and an authority consulted by all who 
use the English language, shah be the first to whom we 
address ourselves. 

" As the world by degrees became more populous," 
says Sir William Blackstone, " it daily became more 
difficult to find out new spots to inhabit, without en- 
croaching upon former occupants; and by constantly 
occupying the same individual spot the fruits of the 
earth were consumed, and its spontaneous produce de- 
stroyed, without any provision for future supply or 
succession. It therefore became necessary to pursue 
some regular method of providing a constant subsistence ; 
and this necessity produced, or at least promoted and 
encouraged, the art of agriculture. And the art of 
agriculture, by a regular connection and consequence, 
introduced and established the idea of a more permanent 
property in the soil than had hitherto been received and 
adopted. It was clear that the earth would not produce 
her fruits in sufficient quantities without the assistance of 
tillage ; but who would be at the pains of tilling it, if 
another might watch an opportunity to seize upon and 
enjoy the product of his industry, art, and labor ? Had 
not, therefore, a separate property in lands, as well as 
movables, been vested in some individuals, the world 
must have continued a forest, and men have been mere 
animals of prey, which, according to some philosophers, 
is the genuine state of nature. Whereas, now (so 
graciously has Providence interwoven our duty and our 
happiness together) the result of this very necessity has 
been the ennobling of the human species by giving it 
opportunities of improving its rational faculties, as well 
as of exerting its natural. Necessity begat property ; and 



and Eminent Domain. 



239 



in order to ensure that property recourse was had to civil 
society, which brought along with it a long train of 
inseparable concomitants — states, government, laws, 
punishments, and the public exercise of religious duties." 
Sharswood's Blackstone — " Of the Rights of Things," 
book II., ch. 1, pp. 7, 8. 

Clear as the statement of this learned jurist is, it is 
surpassed in lucidity and cogency by the words of the 
great doctor of the church, St. Thomas of Aquin, the 
theologian of the church, whom the reigning sovereign 
pontiff proposes to us all as the teacher we should fol- 
low. Where Sir W. Blackstone says, Necessity begat 
property, St. Thomas shows what that necessity is, and 
how nature herself calls for property, or individual 
ownership. 

In the second part of the second division of his great 
work, his Sum of Theology, in showing what is naturally 
just — -justitm naturale — he writes thus : " A thing is 
naturally fitted to (or for) something else by reason of 
what follows from it, as, for example, ownership of prop- 
erty."* St. Thomas here has recourse to an everyday 
mechanical experience of one thing fitting into another, 
like two pieces of wood measured and cut so as to fit 
one into the other. So he says there is a certain fit- 
ting of ideas with each other, and this fitting we dis- 
cover by the study of their nature, and thus from 
what naturally follows from a thing we judge of its 
agreeing with, fitting with, some other thing. The 
study of the nature of land shows that it is fitted for 
ownership — that there is a natural fitness in land that 

* 2a, 29e, quaest. LVIL, art. 3, and qusest. LXVL, art. 2. 



240 



Tenure of Land 



it be held in ownership. The idea of land and the 
idea of private ownership fit together. This special fit- 
ness flows or follows from the nature of land. That 
nature, in this as in other things, determines how it is 
to be possessed, how used. Air and running water, for 
example, can not be held like land, from their very 
nature. It follows from the study of their nature that 
every one has a right to them ; to consume the air by 
breathing, by burning, or in other ways ; to consume 
or use the water for drinking, for steam, for washing, 
or other purposes. From the study of the nature of 
land, as it must be cultivated to produce plentifully, or 
what is wanted, it naturally follows that there is a special 
fitness in it for private or individual ownership. 

In this connection St. Thomas is very exact in distin- 
guishing what is primarily according to natural law, and 
what reason recognizes by deduction as in accordance 
with that same law. He says:* u What is naturally just 
or fit is seen in things in two ways. In one way it is 
seen by the mere (absolute) study or simple considera- 
tion of the thing, as, for example, it is natural for a 
father to provide food for his child. In another way, 
not by the simple consideration of the thing, but by 
something that follows from it, which is apparent from 
a further study of it, its relations, etc." An example 
of this second kind of natural fitness he says is indi- 
vidual ownership of possessions, to give the very word 
he uses. That by the word possessions he means land 
is evident from the fact that he immediately illustrates 
by the example of a field (ager) : "If this field be 



* 2a, 2ae, quaest. LVII., art. 3. 



and Eminent Domain. 241 



considered absolutely, there is nothing in it why it 
should belong- rather to this one than to that one ; but 
if it be considered with regard to cultivation and peace- 
ful use, in this it has a certain fitness for being owned 
by one and not by any other." 

In the second article of Question LXVI. he goes still 
further into this matter. He says : " In relation to what 
is exterior to him two things are proper to man. One 
of these is the power to procure and dispense ; and in 
regard to this it is lawful for him to have what is his 
own. And this is necessary for human life for three 
reasons : first, because one is more solicitous in taking 
care of what is his alone, than of what is common to all 
or many." In this latter case each one would avoid 
work and leave it to others, as happens where there is 
a multitude of servants. To illustrate by a homely but 
good phrase : " What is everybody's business is no- 
body's business." " Secondly," he continues, " because 
human affairs are carried on with more order if it be 
incumbent on each one to take care of some one thing; 
for there would be confusion if every one, without dis- 
tinction, should take care of everything. Thirdly, be- 
cause in this manner peace is kept among men, as each 
is content with what is his own." 

Here comes in a most interesting and lucid distinc- 
tion and explanation by St. Thomas. He takes up the 
main objection to his teaching just laid down. This 
objection he thus states : " It seems it is not lawful 
for any one to possess anything as his own. For 
whatever is contrary to natural law is not lawful. But 
according to natural law all things are common ; to this 
holding in common, private ownership is in opposition. 



242 



Tenure of Land 



Therefore, it is unlawful for any man to appropriate any 
external thing " — land or other. This is certainly 
categoric. Let us see how he answers it These are 
his words : The principle of " community of goods we 
attribute to natural law, not because the law of nature 
dictates that everything is to be held in common, and 
that nothing is to be possessed as one's own, but because 
according to natural law there is no distinction of posses- 
sions, but such distinction [of yours and mine) is rather 
according to human agreement, which is a matter of 
positive law, as we have said above. (Quest. LVIL, 
art. 2 and 3.) Wherefore, private ownership is not con- 
trary to the law of nature, but is superadded to it by the 
deduction of man's reason." 

At first sight these words might appear to favor the 
communistic opinion. But St. Thomas is not going to 
contradict himself. He makes a distinction between the 
natural law and the positive law, and says private 
ownership is according to this positive law. What does 
he mean by this ? Turning to art. 2 of Quest. LVIL, 
he tells us what he means by "positive law" — " what 
the whole people, by public agreement, declare right;" 
and lest any one should misunderstand him, he says, 
" the will of men can make just what is not repugnant 
to natural justice, and such enactments are positive law. 
But if anything have in it what is repugnant to the law 
of nature, it can not be made just by the will of men."* 
This positive law he calls the lazv of nations [Jus Gen- 
tium), and he gives the Jurisconsult Caius' definition of 
it : <; What natural reason has determined among all men, 



* Ad 2um, 



and Eminent Domain. 



243 



that which is observed among all people, is called the 
Law of Nations." St. Augustine, speaking of a law, 
uses the terse expression, Ratio est anima legis — Reason 
is the life of law. St. Thomas means the same thing ; 
and therefore the dictates of the positive law, or of the 
Law of Nations, are based on reason. The jurisconsult 
quoted above by St. Thomas still further illustrates the 
character, the nature, of the Law of Nations, in his 
comments on the Pandects of Justinian (1. 41, § 1, leg. 
1), by saying that " before civil law, the Law of Nations 
was given to the light with the human race itself" — that 
is, came into existence with the human mind itself. 

The theologian Toletus, well known for his commen- 
tary on St. Thomas, says (vol. XI., p. 346, ed Palme, 
1869) on this point, what results from the study of the 
words of the Doctor of the Church, that "human law 
is twofold: one the Law of Nations, which is derived 
by sequence and argument from the natural law ; the 
other positive law, which has its origin in man's will." 
But St. Thomas, as we saw a moment ago, teaching that 
" man's will can not make just what has in it anything 
repugnant to the law of nature," embraces all the enact- 
ments of reason under a general term of positive law, 
and classes under it individual ownership of land, having 
first clearly stated, as we have seen, that this individual 
ownership of land follows from the natural law. 

In using this expression, "individual ownership of land 
follows from the natural law," I do not, therefore, mean 
to say that primarily nature dictates that land is to be 
divided, for primarily all things were common. But, by 
this expression, I do mean that ownership by a private 
person so follows from the nature of the case that reason, 



244 



Tenure of Land 



easily perceiving the fitness of private ownership in the 
present state of things, dictated it through the common 
agreement of men ; so that whosoever opposes such in- 
dividual ownership opposes nature, the natural law, the 
common law of nations, which, as we have seen, is what 
right reason has everywhere ordained. 

From this natural law differs the positive law of men, 
or civil law, which is founded on reasons not intrinsic to 
the state of things, but which men, using their reason, 
judge proper to enact, though they might judge other- 
wise without violating the law of reason. The decisions 
of this kind of positive law are, therefore, arbitrary, not 
following from the nature of the things considered ; but 
they are not in contradiction with it. To illustrate, the 
theologian, Cardinal Cajetan (commenting, 2a, 2ae, quest. 
LXVL, art. 2), says : " In ownership two things are found. 
First, that one thing belong to one person and another 
thing to another person ; second, that this field belong to 
this (definite) person, and that field belong to that person. 
In the first case ownership is by or according to the Law 
of Nations, for reason dictates this. In the second case 
ownership is by or according to positive law, because, 
before a thing is appropiated, there is no reason why it 
should rather belong to one than to another." 

Commenting also on this portion of St. Thomas (2a, 
2ae, quest. LXVL, art. 2, p. 346), Toletus says the theo- 
logians he is quoting and Cardinal Cajetan call the Law 
of Nations (Jus Gentium) the Law of Nature, because it 
is derived from the natural law. 

It is clear, therefore, according to the teachings of the 
great Master of Theology we have been consulting, that 
the right of the individual to have property, to own land, 



and Eminent Domain. 



245 



is taught by reason, and that those who assert the con- 
trary are wrong. So true is this that we find him (in his 
book Contra Gentiles, 1. Hi., p. 127), when writing of the 
early heretics who would possess nothing, speaking in 
this manner: "Therefore are these men heretics because, 
separating themselves from the church, they think those 
have no hope of salvation who use what they themselves 
do not possess." (Nunzio Signoriello, Ethica Specialis, 
p. 59. Naples, 1883.) 

I shall, therefore, using the expression of St. Thomas, 
2a, 2ae, quest. LXVII., as up to the present, during the 
remainder of this lecture, speak, in the sense thus de- 
clared, of private ownership of land as existing by natural 
law (jus turn naturale). 

While nearly all who call themselves Catholics will be 
found holding strongly to this doctrine of individual own- 
ership of land, there are some who unwittingly play into 
the hands of the enemies of the truth, owing to the con- 
fused idea they have concerning the rights of the state 
over the property of individuals. They confound what is 
known as the right of Eminent Domain with a right of 
possession to the land itself, attributing, at least in the 
abstract, such dominion to the state. This is a fatal 
error; for there can not be two possessors. The conces- 
sion that the state is a possessor even in the abstract 
gives up the whole case to the Communist and Socialist ; 
for the principle carried out legitimately would make the 
individual only a tenant at will. It is for this reason very 
important that we should have a precise idea of what 
Eminent Domain is. 

It is not, in the first place, a dominion properly so 
called, which implies ownership. The term " Dominium 



246 



Tenure of Land 



altum " was used by Suarez and others to signify a certain 
power, but not to exclude the ownership of the individual. 
The theory, which originated in feudalism, that all land in 
England was held by the crown, originated in the right of 
conquest. But this conquest is an accidental thing, and 
any right which flows from it must have the same acci- 
dental nature, for it can not rise higher than its source. 
This theory, therefore, does not pertain to the essential 
ideas of natural right to which alone we are to go for prin- 
ciples by which our judgment is to be formed. The same 
thing is to be said about various ways of tenure of land 
in different countries. It is said, with how much truth I 
confess I am not able to say, that the land in Ireland was 
not held in private ownership in early times, about the fifth 
century, but in common by the people. It would seem to 
have been a system such as Professor Stubbs speaks of as 
obtaining in Germany among the Saxons. It may have 
been patriarchal, a system possible where the people are 
not numerous, and are very closely allied with each other 
by blood or interests. But just as in the case of the 
Saxons it was found impracticable to hold land in com- 
mon, just so patriarchal systems are doomed to disap- 
pear and be succeeded by a tenure more in accord 
with the exigencies of society and with the dictates of 
human reason ; for, as we have seen, supposing no prior 
owner, and placing men face to face with the ques- 
tion what they are to do with the land upon which 
they are to dwell, the solution will be that individuals 
are to own the land, and the community is to protect 
the rights of each one. 

One or two preliminary remarks will help us to under- 
stand better what eminent domain is, regarding which 



and Eminent Domain. 



247 



we shall consult authorities, as I have just done. Govern- 
ment exists for the benefit of the people subject to it, and 
authority is a trust to be used for the good of those under 
it. All authority comes from God, and it is to be obeyed 
for conscience sake ; who resists the authority of the state 
resists the ordinance of God. But the state must pro- 
ceed by law, which is an ordination of reason emana- 
ting from the person or persons having the care of the 
community, and made for the common good. Reason 
is the life of law. The state, therefore, has to act for 
the public good and according to reason. Its rights, 
therefore, are not unlimited ; reason limits them in the first 
place, and the public good in the second place ; though 
the reasonableness and the utility of a law are, in them- 
selves, inseparable. The state, therefore, can not arbi- 
trarily and unnecessarily interfere with the rights of 
individuals. But there come circumstances in which 
reason itself dictates that the state must interfere, and 
put in abeyance the rights of individuals, for protection 
or general welfare ; occasionally, in cases of necessity, 
even destroy property, as in times of war. In the pres- 
ent instance I am not called upon to examine the var- 
ious phases of this supreme power inherent naturally in 
every state. I here call attention to it in regard to 
the property, the landed possessions of a country, and 
ask the question, what is the power of the state with 
regard to property ? what is meant by eminent domain, 
the name by which this power is known ? 

Mr. Henry E. Mills, in his treatise on eminent domain, 
calls it the power of the sovereign to condemn private 
property for public use. He quotes Puffendorf (B. 8, c. 
5, § 3), styling it " the exercise of transcendental pro- 



248 



Tenure of Land 



priety," a definition which, implying right of possession 
by the state, a kind of dominion in the abstract, can 
not be accepted. But, further on, he quotes him again 
as saying: " As a general rule, any contribution made by 
a subject to a sovereign, greater than his quota or por- 
tion, requires compensation to the subject." (Puffen- 
dorf, B. 8, c. 8.) The fact of compensation would seem 
to conflict here with the idea of right of possession on 
the part of the state, for such compensation recognizes, 
up to the moment of seizure, the rights of property of 
the person from whom it has been taken. "The civil 
code of France recognizes the necessity of just com- 
pensation, and the annals of all nations enjoying a con- 
stitutional government, and of many despotic nations, 
show that the moral sense of mankind requires such 
compensation. In the United States this right of the 
subject is secured by the Federal Constitution, and by a 
separate clause in the bill of rights of almost every state in 
the Union. In the absence of provisions in the con- 
stitution, the Courts have considered that the principle 
was so universal and fundamental that laws not recog- 
nizing the right of the subject to compensation would 
be void." (p. 1.) 

Judge Cooley, in his Constitutional Limitations (3d 
ed., p. 523), defines eminent domain to be " the rightful 
authority, which exists in every sovereignty, to control 
and regulate those rights of a public nature which pertain 
to its citizens in common, and to appropriate and control 
individual property for the public benefit as the public 
safety, necessity, convenience, or welfare may demand." 
The wording of this writer all implies the right of private 
property. For example (page 524), he says the right of 



and Eminent Domain. 



249 



eminent domain " excludes pre-existing individual rights; 
it seizes property which government can not lawfully 
appropriate under any other right; " it is of strict con- 
struction because it interferes with rights. On page 520 
he says : " It is conceded on all hands that the legisla- 
ture has no power, in any case, to take the property of 
one individual and pass it over to another without 
reference to some use to which it is to be applied for 
the public benefit." In the case of Buckingham v. 
Smith, 10 Ohio. 296, Judge Wood ruled that "the 
principle (of eminent domain) is founded on the superior 
claims of a whole community over an individual citizen ; 
but then only in those cases where private property is 
wanted for public use, or demanded by the public 
welfare. We know of no instance in which it has or 
can be taken, even by state authority, for the mere pur- 
pose of raising revenue by sale or otherwise, and the 
exercise of such a power would be utterly destructive of 
individual right and break down all distinction between 
meum and tuum> and annihilate them forever at the 
pleasure of the states." 

Speaking of compensation, on page 559 Judge Cooley 
says : " It is a primary requisite in the appropriation of 
lands for public purposes that compensation shall be 
made therefor. This compensation must be pecuniary in 
its character, because it is in the nature of a compulsory 
purchase." 

Chancellor Kent, in his Commentaries, vol. II., pp. 
297-399, says: "The right of eminent domain or in- 
herent sovereign power gives to the legislature the 
coiitrol of private property for public uses, and for 
public uses only." " A provision for compensation is 



250 



Tenure of Land 



a necessary attendant on the due and constitutional 
exercise of the power of the lawgiver to deprive an 
individual of his property without his consent; and this 
principle in American constitutional jurisprudence is 
founded on natural* equity, and is laid down by jurists 
as an acknowledged principle of universal law." This 
language is worthy of attentive consideration. The 
power is one of control only ; its exercise requires com- 
pensation, which, as we have said, excludes the idea of 
proprietorship by the state ; natural equity requires 
compensation, because, evidently, the individual's right 
of ownership has, been set aside. Such compensation, 
too, must be made, not for improvements, but for prop- 
erty. The Chancellor goes on to insist that this com- 
pensation must be offered before the seizure. The very 
idea of compensation offered thus previously to seizure 
gives us to understand that the state is in no way the 
owner of the land. Were it otherwise, the state might 
be considered to, and could re-enter into possession of its 
own, giving the tenant, afterward, action for damages, for 
reimbursement for improvements, if such understanding 
existed ; for it is ordinarily understood that any im- 
provement of a permanent character, put there by the 
tenant of his own accord, adheres to the soil and belongs 
to the owner. 

This will suffice to show that in the minds of these 
three legal authorities eminent domain is not a right 
of possession of the property of individuals, but only a 
power of control for the public good ; which power 
must respect individual rights, and make compensation 



* Italics ours. 



and Eminent Domain. 



for loss when the state is obliged to seize property. 
By the exercise of eminent domain the state does not 
re-enter into any right; it simply uses all proper 
means to protect the community, which is the primal 
duty, and therefore right, of supreme authority. 

Turning to some of our theologians of name, we find 
Suarez thus writing (Opusc. de Justitia Dei, s. 4, n. 6) : 
" The republic or king has a certain high dominion over 
the possessions of all the citizens, and the private prop- 
erty of all, which does not exclude their private do- 
minion ; but, notwithstanding that, it gives power to use 
these goods for the common utility of the republic, 
when the moment of need calls for it." 

Professor J. Costa-Rosetti, S. J., in his Moral Philoso- 
phy,* speaking on this point (p. 550), remarks that what 
is known as Dominium Altum " should rather be called 
" Jus sufierius" Higher Right ; because this expression 
Dominium Altum (Eminent Domain) is in danger of 
being abused, and has been abused by despots" He then 
states categorically that " this right of eminent domain 
is not dominion or right of possession of property, so 
called, for it is not the object of commutative justice, 
which alone regards dominion proper." Eminent do- 
main, therefore, even in the abstract, is not a sovereign 
possession of the land which grants to individuals the 
right to use certain portions of it, reserving to itself the 
right to re-enter into possession when it judges neces- 
sary. It is the object of distributive justice as regards 
its exercise, for that regulates the burdens and the 
benefits of the citizens ; as regards the citizen, legal 

* Innsbruck, 1886. 



252 



Tenure of Land 



justice requires him to obey and render the community 
what is due from him; commutative justice relates to 
purchase, and therefore implies dominion ; but the very 
idea of the state selling its eminent domain is absurd. 
Why ? First, because it has no dominion to part with 
by sale ; and because, secondly, that right is a right 
essential to sovereignty, and, like the sovereignty of the 
state, can not be parted with. It transcends all idea of 
dominion — is, in fact, a right to be used not to despoil 
the subject, but to protect him in the enjoyment of 
his rights, among these also his right to his land. 

Having seen what legal authorities and learned theo- 
logians have to say on this point of eminent domain, 
let us sum up briefly. 

Eminent domain differs from ownership : 

First, in itself. Ownership gives dominion, eminent 
domain does not ; for it is only a right of control, 
though a sovereign right, inherent in supreme power. 
And this right of eminent domain does not differ in 
any essential point from the general control which the 
state exercises over all the rights of its citizens. Saltis 
Populi Suprema Lex, the Safety of the Republic is the 
Supreme Law, is the axiom which is a key to under- 
standing the true nature of this higher right or eminent 
domain. How the right of control is to be exercised 
is determined by the special nature of the right or 
rights the control of which has become necessary. 

Second, in its conception. The idea of private own- 
ership is first in the mind ; then arises the idea of the 
control of it. Ownership in common, we may grant, 
was the original mode of ownership. But it was only 
one mode of ownership, just as private ownership is 



and Eminent Domain. 



253 



another mode. When, by the act of the community, 
ownership in common ceased, the community no longer 
retained any ownership in what the private individual 
had begun to own. There remained only the sovereign 
right of control inherent in the supreme power. This 
idea of sovereign control, in the logical order, arises in 
the mind following on the idea of private ownership; 
as we must first conceive the idea of what is to be 
controlled before we can have the idea of controlling it. 

Third, in its scope. Ownership is for the benefit and 
support of the family. Eminent domain exists, not for 
the support of the state, but for its protection, and con- 
sequent protection of the rights of all. The state may 
purchase and hold property for its benefit and support, as, 
for example, a tract of wooded land. But, then, this is 
the same ownership as that enjoyed by the individual, 
and is regulated by the same laws. 

Fourth, in its powers and in the exercise of them. 
Ownership allows the owner to dispose of his property 
when and how he pleases. Eminent domain seizes 
property only in certain cases determined by the public 
need. That need also directs how that property shall be 
disposed of. Compensation, too, must be made. Even 
when eminent domain is spoken of as " a right of trans- 
cendental propriety," as we have seen Puffendorf style it, 
the writer requires compensation, which implies owner- 
ship by the individual. The law requires compensation 
to be offered before seizure, which shows respect for the 
owner's right. 

Eminent domain, therefore, is essentially distinct from 
the right of ownership, which it excludes from its very 
conception, compensating as it does the owner for his 
property, which can be seized only for public uses for 



2 54 



T enter e of Land. 



the public good. It is easy to understand, then, how 
wide of the mark they are who confound it with dominion 
proper. It would be bad enough to err in stating the 
contrary, were such an error only speculative or theoret- 
ical. But in the present tendency of many to apply this 
erroneous judgment in a practical manner, so as to take 
away property from the owner and tax it to its full value 
per year as rent to the state, it becomes a most danger- 
ous error, and should be guarded against most carefully, 
for it is the basis of the Socialistic and Communistic sys- 
tems, which, as a learned writer already quoted, says : 
" agree in this, that they war against property." (N. 
Signoriello, Eth. Specialis, p. 58.) Socialism has been 
too often condemned by the supreme authority of the 
church to need that we enter any further into the treat- 
ment of it. It will suffice to refer here to the Encyclical 
Letters of Pius IX., "Qui Pluribus," of Nov. 9, 1846, 
" Nescitis et Nobiscum,'' of Dec. 18, 1849, an d " Quibus 
Luctuosissimis," of Sept. 5, 185 1. Finally, the Ency- 
clical Letter of the present sovereign pontiff, Leo XIII., 
" Quod Apostolici Muneris,'' of Dec. 8, 1878, speaks 
thus in condemnation of this and like systems: "Allured 
by cupidity of the goods of this life, which is the root of 
all evil, in seeking which some have erred from faith 
(I. Tim. vi., 10), they attack the right of owning property y 
which right the natural law sanctions, and by an enor- 
mous crime, while they seem to consult the needs and 
desires of all men, strive to seize and hold in common 
whatever has been acquired by title of legitimate inheri- 
tance, by mental or manual labor, or by frugality of life." 
So speaks the leader of God's hosts ; the trumpet gives 
no uncertain sound ; we know our banner, and upon it 
we read, " Be just to all ; respect every man's right." 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



XV. 



TEMPORAL POWER AND THE PAPACY. 

{The Forum, May, 1888.) 

HE recent events at Rome, and the sympathy so 



1 generally shown toward Pope Leo XIII. on the 
occasion of his priestly Jubilee, have again called atten- 
tion to the question of the temporal power of the pope, 
which by many had been judged a thing of the past. 
Emilio Castelar, in his article on the subject, published 
not long since in the Fortnightly Review may be 
taken as the exponent of this class of persons, and very 
fairly. He has a facile pen and ready speech, but this 
is not enough to guarantee a writer from going wide 
of the mark. Were Emilio Castelar not a Spaniard, 
that is, born and bred in the midst of a Catholic at- 
mosphere, where he could or ought to have known 
better, little fault could be found with his taking the 
views he does. But nearly every line betrays the 
partisan of ideas which cannot but be condemned by 
the church, in the bosom of which he is supposed to 
have been baptized in his first days of existence. He 
moreover makes evident his want of knowledge of 
Catholic principles in his observations on the encyclical, 
Immortale Dei, which is no new departure, but the affir- 
mation of the old teachings of the church. He is 




256 



Temporal Power 



superficial, too, in his criticism of Pope Leo XIII. 's 
course with Italy and with Germany. He has lost his 
bearings, and misjudges, in consequence, the action of 
the pontiff, who is bound by every reason to seek the 
welfare of the church, which absolutely calls for the very 
steps he has taken in both countries ; steps which in 
Germany have already produced such useful results, and 
have made the German Chancellor declare that the 
papacy is not a foreign institution in the German Em- 
pire. Senor Castelar, instead of looking on the " abro- 
gation of the laws of May " as a triumph of papal 
diplomacy, holds it up as a proof of the fact that there 
still exists in Germany hostility to the papal "tiara," and 
opposition to the pope's spiritual jurisdiction, because this 
abrogation has only "just" taken place. The partisan- 
ship displayed here makes the writer, despite his experi- 
ence and reputation, an unreliable judge in the matter 
we are about to consider. 

We propose to place before the reader, in these 
remarks, what may enable him to form his own judg- 
ment on the question of the necessity of the temporal 
power of the pope, free from all undue influence. To 
effect this we must clearly give adequate reasons to make 
it evident that, if the church is to be free and untram- 
meled, and not under " hostile domination," the temporal 
power is a necessity. There is no need to go into details 
as to the origin of the temporal power. It is enough 
to know that no one can dispute the legitimate claims 
of the temporal dominion of the popes in the past, which 
was the outcome of the circumstances of the times. The 
subject is narrowed down just now to this : Is the 
restoration of the temporal power advisable, in view of 



and the Papacy. 



257 



the greatly increased influence of the papacy since 
September 20, 1870? Is it a necessity to the church? 
If we succeed in showing that it is necessary, its advis- 
ability becomes a matter of course. 

What is this Catholic Church, for which we are 
claiming something so incompatible with modern ideas 
as the possession of temporal sovereignty for its head ? 
An answer sufficient for the case is, that the Catholic 
Church is a necessary union of the people of the earth; 
necessary, because the church is a body under one visible 
head, the successor of the Apostle Peter, as is the 
fundamental teaching ; and for all nations, because 
Christ gave the command to the apostles, with Peter 
at their head, "Go teach all nations;" and for these 
reasons it is the strongest, the most compact and neces- 
sary moral organization on the face of the earth, em- 
bracing over two hundred millions of the most 
enlightened men, and with all the moral force that such 
an organization means. It follows that every individual 
of this vast multitude is directly concerned in the welfare, 
the relations, and the position of the head of the church. 
It is a vital question with the members of the body 
whether the head is in good condition. The office of 
the pope is to teach and to rule his spiritual subjects, 
and temporal sovereignty is a secondary and accidental 
adjunct to this, though one that is morally necessary. 
Why ? Because it is necessary that his power to teach 
and rule be so free from pressure as to be above sus- 
picion, and, we may add, so unhampered as to give in , 
his immediate surroundings the model of that ecclesias- 
tical economy which is to be copied by others elsewhere 
in the world. 



258 Temporal Power 

It does not seem a difficult thing to impress every 
one with the absolute necessity of the freedom of the 
pope from all undue influence. Is it not, in fact, the 
universal answer to the complaint about the want of 
freedom of the pope, that he is free, that the Italian 
Government does not interfere with the pope, that he 
can do what he pleases, hold consistories, give audi- 
ences, celebrate canonizations, and say mass in St. 
Peter's ? " So the pope is free " — such is the refrain. 
It proves one thing, that those who so speak recog- 
nize, from the nature of the case, the necessity of such 
freedom. Whether they believe or not the faith he 
teaches, they see that one whose lightest word is treas- 
ured up by millions of every clime, who look upon him 
as the guide of their conscience, must be above sus- 
picion of any controlling influence ; must be, not in 
word, but in fact, supreme. This cannot be otherwise 
than by a perfect temporal independence, to be brought 
about only through the possession of territorial domin- 
ion. Let us see if this assertion can be substantiated. 

The popes have often been dispossessed. Every time 
this has happened social conditions have been disturbed, 
and order has been restored only by the restoration of 
the pope to his dominions. History records some forty 
such vicissitudes. It has thus come to be, as it were, 
an axiom among statesmen, that the Bishop of Rome 
must be a temporal sovereign. This may sound strange 
to an American ear ; but we, who at the outset of our 
country's history disfranchised the District of Columbia 
for the good of all the States, should not object to 
Rome and its dependencies remaining under regal rule, 
even should Italy become a republic, which it is not. 



and the Papacy. 



259 



While the church holds that, ''justice being observed," 
the republican is a good form of government, she also 
takes the common-sense view that the monarchical 
form is not to be condemned as bad. That statesmen 
should see the need of temporal sovereignty for the 
pope, we can appreciate from a few facts. 

What happened to the Roman pontiffs under the Ro- 
man emperors and till the time of Charlemagne is gen- 
erally well known. They were made to feel, time and 
again, the power of the sovereign ; imprisonment and 
death too often waited on the conscientious perform- 
ance of duty ; and it is impossible to think of these 
historic facts without admiration of the heroism the 
popes displayed, and astonishment that the church could 
have been able to survive. At times all the engines of 
imperial hate and tyranny were brought to bear on the 
one man who dared to brave, in the name of God, the 
fury of a despot. The barbarian rulers of Italy, who 
succeeded each other after the fall of the Western Em- 
pire, treated the Bishop of Rome with haughty con- 
tempt. The reigns of Odoacer and Theocloric are most 
instructive in this respect ; the former, asserting for 
himself, through pretended concession of Pope Simpli- 
city, the right of consent to the succession of the next 
pope, was the first to interfere with the freedom of 
election. Theodoric, the Arian king of the Ostro-Goths, 
not only interfered with the succession, but threw Pope 
John I. into prison, where, on the 18th of May, 526, he 
died. 

But we have an illustration of the same thing nearer 
our own day. Napoleon carried off Pope Pius VII. into 
captivity, and detained him in prison, first at Savona, 



260 



Temporal Power 



and afterward at Fontainebleau. D'Haussonville has 
published the account of this captivity, and an interest- 
ing review of his work can be found in the Dublin 
Review of October, 1871. The pope was subjected to 
indignity and duress, and surrounded by spies. Dr. 
Porta, his physician, the prefect writes, was gained over ; 
and while those faithful to the pope were left in straits, 
the doctor got his salary of 12,000 francs a year, be- 
cause he was "of wonderful use to us." So harsh was 
the treatment to which the pope was subjected, in the 
determined effort to wring ruinous concessions from him, 
that his mind partially gave way. The Prefect de 
Chabrol, his jailer, writes confidentially to M. Bigot de 
Preameneu : " At this moment the mental alienation has 
gone by, and the physical disorder is less severe." It 
was during this time that, deceived by his counselors 
and by the creatures of Napoleon, he made the mis- 
takes which he so nobly corrected in his better mind. 
These mistakes concerned the government of the church 
and the appointment of bishops. Next morning, when 
able to examine things more calmly, he would not for- 
give himself, declared he had not observed the last 
article of the document, insisted on recalling what he 
had consented to, and exclaimed, as he roused himself 
from his depression, " Happily, I have signed nothing." 

Facts like these are known to statesmen, and therefore 
we are not surprised to see them recognize the importance 
of papal independence. Napoleon himself recognized it, 
though, in his own case, he trampled on the conviction 
or forgot it. In his conversation with M. Emery he 
says : " I took away the pope's temporal power be- 
cause he does not know how to use it, and because 



and the Papacy. 



261 



it interferes with the exercise of his spiritual functions. 
What do you say to that ? " In reply M. Emery quoted 
Bossuet as declaring that "the independence and 
complete liberty of the sovereign pontiff are necessary 
for the free exercise of his spiritual authority through- 
out the world in so great a multiplicity of empires and 
kingdoms." Bossuet "rejoiced at the temporal power, 
not only for the sake of the apostolic see, but still more 
for that of the church universal." "Well," was the 
answer of Napoleon, " I do not reject the authority of 
Bossuet. All that was true in his times, when Europe 
acknowledged a number of masters. It would then 
have been unsuitable that the pope should have been 
the subject of any one sovereign. But what inconven- 
ience is there in the pope's being subject to me — to 
me, I say, now that Europe knows no master except 
myself alone ? " M. Emery's reply was a very wise 
one : " Your majesty is better acquainted than I with 
the history of revolutions. What exists now may not 
always exist, and therefore the inconveniences foreseen 
by Bossuet might once more make their appearance. 
Therefore the order of things so wisely established ought 
not to be changed." 

M. Adolphe Thiers, the first president of the Repub- 
lic of France, saw this same necessity of the temporal 
sovereignty very clearly. In a debate in the Corps 
Legislatif he stated that he " had known all the arch- 
bishops of Paris from the beginning of the century. 
They were all most estimable men. But I should not 
have wished any one of them pope, because Notre 
Dame is too near the Tuileries ! " In a diplomatic con- 
versation with M. de Corcelle, the French ambassador 



262 



Temporal Pozver 



to the pope, he said : " We cannot give back to the 
pope his temporal power ; we will give him the bish- 
ops ; " that is, leave him free in the choice of them. 
The maintenance of the embassies and legations by the 
courts of Europe, the establishment of diplomatic rela- 
tions by the German emperor, preceded by a visit to 
the pope on the part of the crown prince, who not only 
carefully avoided anything that could be interpreted as 
meaning forgetfulness of the claims of the pope to tem- 
poral sovereignty, but did everything customary to be 
done by the representatives of France and of Austria — 
all these facts show very plainly in what light the tem- 
poral sovereignty is held, especially when we take into 
consideration the recent honors diplomatically paid to 
Pope Leo XIII. 

But, more than all this, the present state of things in 
Italy manifests the necessity of the pope's temporal do- 
minion. What is that present state ? Pius IX. de- 
clared himself to be u sub hostili dominatione constitutus " 
(subject to a hostile rule) ; and Leo XIII. has expressed 
frequently the same idea. Is this true ? Let us see. 

When the Ratazzi ministry resolved to invade what 
remained of the Papal States. Victor Emmanuel, appre- 
ciating the need of the temporal power, and not under- 
standing fully whither he was going, assured Pius IX., 
through Cardinal Corsi, that Rome would not be taken. 
The pope believed him , and this is the explanation of 
the words of Pius IX., which the revolutionists laughed 
to scorn: " Xon so no prof eta, ne figlio di prof eta ; via 
vi dico che non entrarete:' (I am not a prophet nor the 
son of a prophet ; but I tell you, you will not enter.) 
The Italian troops did enter ; the king gave way to his 



and the Papacy. 



263 



customary ebullition of temper, then acquiesced, and 
Cardinal Corsi, mortified beyond measure, pined away 
and died. Rome became, through the farce of the ple- 
biscite, the capital of Italy. But a modus vivendi was 
absolutely necessary to quiet Europe, and the law of 
guarantees, so-called, was enacted. Among sundry pro- 
visions more or less offensive to the papal dignity is 
Article XVII. : 

"The recognition of the judicial effects of the spiritual and dis- 
ciplinary acts, as well as of any other act of ecclesiastical authority, 
belongs to the civil jurisdiction. Such acts, however, are void of 
effect if contrary to the law of the state or to public order, or hurt- 
ful to the rights of private persons, and are subject to the penal laws 
if they constitute a crime." 

The first draft of Article XVII. was too strong. It 
said openly that, in case of conflict between the civil 
and ecclesiastical powers, the supreme civil tribunal of 
the kingdom was to decide. This was toned down to 
suit rather tender susceptibilities ; but the article says 
the same thing in even stronger terms, if we look to the 
penal sanction referred to. Here, then, was the official 
legal subjugation of the pope to Italy, making him a 
subject and a prisoner, as he already was by force of 
arms. Again, in a discussion in Parliament, the Senator 
Amari, speaking of the impossibility of reconciliation 
between Italy and the papacy, gave as a reason that 
the Constitution of Italy was little more than a docu- 
ment embracing the propositions of the " Syllabus," 
condemned by Rome. This is as true as it is pithy, 
and places the antagonism of the two powers forcibly 
before the mind. This is in the speculative order ; in 
the practical sphere the exactions and confiscations of 



264 



Temporal Power 



the Italian Government, the suppression of religious 
corporations, the numberless acts of oppression on its 
part, make the opposition yet more pronounced. Even 
the property of the Propaganda, the gift of people of 
various nations for the welfare of the missions, has not 
been respected. To seize and sell the property of a 
board of foreign missions here would certainly be de- 
servedly condemned by all. Yet this is what the Italian 
Government has done, giving in return credit, on the 
Book of the Public Debt, for a sum, the interest of 
which it taxes at the rate of thirteen and one-fifth per 
centum. More important than these financial embarrass- 
ments caused to the church, is the system of espionage 
kept up by the Italian Government's agents with regard 
to the Vatican. It is the boast, at the offices of state, 
that whatever goes on at the Vatican is known there at 
once. The appropriation and publication of the circular 
of Cardinal Rampolla, when we were last in Rome, we 
saw laid to the charge of those who were acting for the 
government of Italy. Is this freedom, or is it captivity ? 
The weekly " Gossip from the Vatican," published by 
the Italie shows that profane eyes are watching, and 
profane ears listening, in the sacred precincts of the 
papal palace. 

To all this we must add that the influence of the 
government is thrown in favor of teaching and of legis- 
lation favorable to irreligion and vice ; for Moleschott 
teaches in the University, and the police license houses 
of ill repute. We have grave reason, then, to think, that 
the incompatibility of Italy and the pope is radical and 
lasting. What makes this more apparent is the fact that 
the spirit of the Italian Government is the spirit of free- 



and the Papacy. 



265 



masonry. On what terms freemasonry and the church 
are, is well known. European masonry means natural- 
ism, and the church means revelation, the supernatural 
in religion. The two have met on the field of Rome, and 
it is a duel to the death. When the late Signor Depretis, 
Premier of Italy, died, last August, Signor Adriano 
Lemmi, Grand Master of the Masonic Order, Sovereign 
Delegate, Grand Commander of the Supreme Council of 
the Thirty-three, sent to Signora Depretis the following 
telegram, which throws light on what we have just said : 

" Italian masonry is proud of the honors paid to their illustrious 
brother, Agostino Depretis 33.'., who, up to the very last moments 
of his life, defended and professed masonic principles with honor, 
courage, loyalty. In our lodges we shall remember always that he 
devoted himself to the triumph of its humanitarian and generous 
aspirations. To you, madam, his faithful and dear companion, 
Italian masonry expresses its sincere condolence and its solemn 
desire : Educate his son that he follow the example of his father in 
the holy hatred of the implacable enemy of civilization and of our 
country. This enemy, covering itself with the spoils of Christ, 
redoubles, though in vain, its plots against the great work at which, 
together with the glorious band of our conspirators, soldiers, and 
martyrs, Agostino Depretis labored, to make, and cause so to remain, 
Rome intangible, eternal. u Adriano Lemmi." 

With such facts and documents we are prepared to hear 
Pope Leo XIII. thus address the recent Italian pilgrimage, 
on January 3d, last. Speaking of the Jubilee, he says : 

" This fact, certainly, is due to the action of Divine Providence, 
which makes the most ordinary circumstances and the least fit 
instruments serve the glory of the church. But this fact finds its 
true reason in the exceeding importance of the pontificate. * * * 
What nation would not think itself fortunate in giving hospitality to 
this divine institution ? On the other hand, what folly to wish to 
belittle it, by making the mode and conditions of its existence a 



266 



Temporal Pozver 



question of the internal order of one country, of one nation ! What 
an indignity to wish to have it cast down and humbled in its see, to 
wish to put obstacles in the way of its free and beneficent action, to 
place it in the position of a subject, and make it dependent on the 
will of an assembly or of a ministry ! Assuredly, the Catholics of 
the whole world, jealous of the liberty of their head, and all who 
have at heart the cause of order and of the safety of human society, 
will never tolerate it." 

We began this paper by criticising Emilio Castelar ; 
we close it by quoting the words of another Spaniard, 
equally illustrious, Canovas del Castillo, who, on the 6th 
of February, 1885, being at that time a minister of the 
crown, made the following declaration, as published in 
the semi-official Union, of Madrid, in answer to Senor 
Labra's assertion that he had spoken of the Roman ques- 
tion as one of the internal order of the kingdom of Italy: 
" Whatever is possible and necessary in favor of the in- 
dependence of the common father of the faithful, the 
present government of Spain will do with zeal, and so 
will do also the Conservative party as long as it shall re- 
main in power." And he (Canovas) "will so act from 
his own convictions and antecedents. What I think, 
many Catholics think, the immense majority, not to say 
nearly all , and it is, that a certain historic form of the 
pontificate is most suitable, most important, necessary for 
this very independence." This is very categoric, and, 
considering the position of the speaker, who had to be 
guarded in his utterances, weighty, as showing this states- 
man's agreement with the words just quoted from the 
reply of Leo XIII. 

Passing from statesmen to the people, we conclude with 
three telegrams lately sent to the pope. The first is from 
Switzerland, as follows : 



and the Papacy. 



267 



" The President of the Council of Administration of the Catholic 
Publishing Society unites with the Director-general of the Work of 
St. Paul, in offering to your holiness their most sincere and respect- 
ful greetings, resolved to offer their life for you, that there may 
still be a small portion of the earth where the human race can 
breathe. This is our greatest glory, our greatest happiness." 

The next is from Lisle, January 8 : 

"The Catholics of Lisle send to their most beloved father the 
homage of their fidelity, and their most ardent desires for the 
triumph of his rights." 

The last is from the Catholics of Bonn, published 
December 29, 1887 : 

"The Catholics of Bonn, celebrating solemnly the most auspicious 
day on which your holiness completes your fiftieth year of priest- 
hood, giving expression to their best wishes, declare their fidelity 
and devotion to the apostolic see, and trust that it may shortly re- 
conquer its full liberty and recover its full power," 

This article would deservedly be deemed incomplete 
did we not at least mention the movement going on in 
Italy, even among the Liberals, looking to the restoration 
of the temporal power. Colonel Fazzari, an ex-Gari- 
baldian, was elected to Parliament on this issue. He re- 
signed, because he found the members so hostile to the 
idea, but satisfied in having — -we hope we shall not be 
censured for saying it — made a break in the record. 
General Turr, another ex-Garibaldian, proposed his plan 
for securing the papal independence by making Rome a 
seaport, and leaving it to the pope. The deputy Tosca- 
nelli, too, published a letter advocating the cession of a 
part of Rome and the territory back of the Vatican. 
Others have published views more or less similar, all 
showing that they feel that they have a knotty question 



268 Temporal Power and the Papacy. 



on their hands that must be solved in favor of sovereign 
independence of the pope. 

This great demonstration, the facts, and the declara- 
tions we have cited, will speak for themselves. The 
Italian Government has not misunderstood them, and by- 
its action in turning out of office the mayor of Rome, 
Duke Leopold Torlonia, and the mayors of Pocapaglia, 
of Trezzo Tinella, and of Gavazzana, because they, by- 
acts, showed good feeling toward the pope, has given us 
the best evidence that it fears this demonstration in 
favor of the sovereign pontiff, as the handwriting on the 
wall, the " mene, thekel, phares," of Italian domination 
over Rome. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



XVI. 



CAN THERE BE SUCH A THING AS A MIRACLE? 



ROM the press of Longmans, Green & Co., London,- 



1 1889, nas issued a small publication which, but 
for the circumstances of the time, might have passed al- 
most unnoticed. It contains two sermons by Prof. T. H. 
Green, M.A., LL.D., Fellow of Baliol College and 
Whyte Professor of Moral Philosophy in the University 
of Oxford. What constitutes their special interest is 
the fact that they are the lay sermons which Mrs. 
Humphrey Ward makes Robert Elsmere attend, and 
which had so powerful an effect on him. That anything 
could be written by a gentleman of such a position 
and acknowledged ability not meriting serious con- 
sideration no one would assert. Our expectation of 
finding a great deal that marked the man of learning 
and the metaphysician has not been disappointed. What, 
in addition to the ability and the ingenuity they mani- 
fest, has impressed us particularly is the earnestness of 
Prof. Green, a great factor in arresting the attention 
and conciliating respect, if not enforcing assent. 

The remarkable feature, however, of these productions 
is the attempt to preserve the results and fruits of 



{The Catholic World, June, 1889.) 




269 



Can there be such 



Christianity while doing away with the great facts upon 
which it was founded, an attempt similar to that which 
would cut from its roots a fine tree in full foliage in 
the expectation of keeping it always fresh and vigorous. 
They are noteworthy, too, in another sense, as being 
the outcome of the systems which have constantly and 
persistently denied the possibility of miracles nowadays. 
By so doing there has been bred a habit of thought 
which has rendered Prof. Green's conception possible 
with many of those who belong, or have belonged, to 
the religious organizations which took form and shape 
after the beginning of the sixteenth century. This 
habit of mind rejects the supernatural, and rejecting it 
now, by an easy procedure rejects it in the past. 
Modern science, too, comes in as a most powerful 
auxiliary in fostering such a mental disposition ; though, 
to do Prof. Green justice, he scores scientific men for 
issuing from their legitimate sphere of positive demon- 
stration when they seek to deny the spiritual existence, 
although he does accept their rejection of miracle, 
because he and they do not admit of a variation from 
natural laws (p. 78). The process of denial has not 
stopped here. We do not think any one could be 
blamed for saying that the sermons, especially the one 
on faith, show the pantheistic leaning of the professor. 
We instance his words, p. 93, regarding the rejection 
of the " anthropomorphic formulae in which we have 
been used to express to ourselves the presence and 
action of God as an external person moulding nature 
to his purposes, and intervening in it when and how he 
will" ; p. 95 : "It is yourself, not as you are but as in 
seeking him you become, that is his revelation " ; p. 97 : 



a Thing as a Miracle f 



271 



" God is not something outside and beyond the con- 
sciousness of him, any more than duty is outside and 
beyond the consciousness of it." As Prof. Green, p. 
78, intimates that science does not misunderstand " its 
nature and office in showing the supernatural to be a 
mere phrase to which no reality corresponds," as God 
only is the supernatural, it would seem to follow from 
his idea that God is merely a natural manifestation in 
human nature, by which he reveals himself in the soul ; 
in other words, the consciousness of one's self, of the 
higher and better thought, is the consciousness of God ; 
which appears to identify God with the soul. 

But it is not so much with this or other points with 
which we cannot agree that we propose to occupy our 
readers to-day ; it is the scepticism which pervades the 
book which calls for remark, a scepticism which re- 
assumes all that has gone before it, such as was to have 
been looked for in a man so well informed and so 
familiar with the works of the greatest opponents of 
revelation, and its teachings or dogmas. Whether the 
scepticism is a reaction against the systems which, 
while setting up the right of private judgment against 
the claims of the old church to teach with authority, 
arrogated to themselves the right to dictate what should 
be believed, and enforced their views by penalties ; or 
whether it has come from a genuine loss of faith ; or 
from some less worthy motive, matters little to our 
purpose. The fact is there, and it is with the fact we 
propose to deal. 

This scepticism may be said to be directed first 
against the accounts which tell of the beginnings of 
Christianity — that is, against the Scriptures, especially 



272 



Can there be stick 



of the New Testament ; and secondly against the^facts 
narrated which in any way are looked upon as super- 
natural — that is, wrought by God mediately or imme- 
diately, miracles. 

We assume that all fair-minded men are looking for 
the truth, and that as far as preconceived notions, which 
we more or less all have, permit, are prepared to accept 
truth — fact ; to deny a fact is to deny the truth. The 
appreciation of a fact is another thing. In this century 
it is undeniable, and a glory of our day, that the 
critical art, the art of judicially discerning the value of 
documentary evidence, has reached great perfection, has 
corrected many errors, and has led to many discov- 
eries, the end of which we are glad to hope and believe 
is not yet. The more the light is concentrated on the 
Sacred Books of Christianity, the more they manifest 
their truthfulness. The immense mass of evidence which 
for a long time lay hid from the general gaze, buried 
in the writings of great men of the past, having been 
judiciously sifted and brought forward, has to a very 
great extent brought about greater trust in them as 
narratives, and has had the effect of blunting the shafts 
of hostile critics with all who, as Cardinal Newman has 
aptly put it, appreciate " that a difficulty is not a 
doubt." A man, for instance, may know a geometrical 
proposition is true, but may be ignorant of, or have 
forgotten, some step in the process of demonstration, 
which, however, he knows his teacher will show him. 
He has a difficulty, but no doubt of the truth. Just so 
must it be from the very nature of the case with 
Scripture, which for the most part we have in trans- 
lations, not in the original, and which among us is 



a Thing as a Miracle ? 



273 



always read in the translation. In the original Greek 
there are thousands of varying readings which create 
difficulties, and this is all the more felt, because few 
have knowledge of the ancient languages and the 
leisure absolutely necessary for such study. Yet what- 
ever difficulty exists did not prevent Tischendorf from 
giving us his splendid editions of the Greek text, 
notwithstanding he was not a believer in Christianity, 
and did his work only as a scholar. To us it has 
always seemed that the sole authority of St. Jerome, 
despite whatever it is possible to say against him per- 
sonally, was more than sufficient to compel assent to 
the genuineness of the Scriptures, so great were his 
learning, his knowledge of languages, of Hebrew and of 
Syriac, and his opportunities on account of his contact 
with the Jews at Antioch and elsewhere, besides his 
fearlessness in saying what he thought. 

To the aid of criticism comes archaeology. The im- 
pulse given to archaeological research in our day a 
Christian cannot but regard as providential. The dis- 
coveries of Layard at Nineve, of Schliemann at Troy 
and at Mycenae, the Cesnola Museum of New York, 
speak a language that rebukes the doubt of Niebuhr 
and of Dr. Arnold. As Mr. Thomas H. Dyer writes, 
in his " History of the City of Rome : " " There is little 
motive to falsify the origin and dates of public monu- 
ments and buildings ; and, indeed, their falsification would 
be much more difficult than that of events transmitted 
by oral tradition, or even recorded in writing. In fact, 
we consider the remains of some of the monuments of 
the regal and republican periods to be the best proofs 
of the fundamental truth of early Roman history." We 



274 



Can there be suck 



think one could go farther and warn people against 
rejecting blindly the traditions of a nation or of a city. 
We once saw the prudence of this very strikingly. 
Those who visited Rome some twenty years ago or less, 
and spent any time there, were familiar with the figure 
of Baron Ercole Visconti. He was a clever and a 
learned man, and so regarded notwithstanding some 
amiable foibles, very pardonable. The Romans were in- 
clined to think he put too much faith in Visconti. One 
day he identified himself with a tradition of the Roman 
people at which the more learned smiled. The tradi- 
tion had it that the marble-yard on the way to St. 
Paul's- outside- the- Walls, and opposite St. Michele, was 
the site of the old Roman yard for the sale of marbles 
of various kinds. We well remember the laughter at 
his expense, and his friends gently twitted him. But 
his reading led him to think as he did, and having 
obtained permission of Pius IX. to make the requisite 
excavations on the public ground, he began. It was 
not many days before all were amused at the result. 
The baron had found a graveyard. Deep down he had 
come upon a cemetery for slaves. But the inscriptions 
and the objects told him he was not much earlier than 
the middle ages ; so he kept on, and finally was re- 
warded by discovering the Emporium, with its wealth 
of precious marbles, and the perfect slip going down to 
the water's edge, and the travertine block with the hole 
through which the hawser passed that moored the 
barges to the bank. 

If such things happen in regard to profane history, 
why should they not also occur with reference to sacred 
history ? It is a fact that the history of Abraham and 



a Thing as a Miracle f 



275 



of the kings who with Chordorlahomor opposed him, 
and the history of Joseph, have received light and con- 
firmation from the discoveries in Assyria, and from the 
hieroglyphs of Egypt. A sceptical spirit, therefore, in 
regard to history is unreasonable ; it is as reprehensible 
as a prudent reserve is commendable. Critical exam- 
ination has proven against all assault that the Scriptures 
are the most authentic and trustworthy books ever writ- 
ten, and the truth of the books of the New Testament 
has been borne witness to by thousands of Christians 
who sealed their faith with their blood at the very time 
when they were written, and received the name of 
martyrs precisely because they gave, in this way, 
testimony. 

The other point at which scepticism aims is the 
supernatural event narrated in the Bible. This is the 
main object of attack ; strip the Bible of everything 
miraculous, and there will be no difficulty in having it 
accepted, so much does its morality and beauty com- 
mend it to the admiration of all. Prof. Green admires 
it, but in proportion to his admiration is his repugnance 
to the supernatural and miraculous, which is so great as 
to make him reject everything of the kind, the Resur- 
rection included. 

The discussions on this subject have had for their 
result a certain indefiniteness of view with regard to 
what is miraculous. Recent writers have given defini- 
tions of a miracle, some of which it may be opportune 
to lay before the reader. 

" Miracles," says Mr. Gladstone in his criticism of 
" Robert Elsmere," " constitute a language of heaven em- 
bodied in material signs, by which communication is 



Can there be such 



established between the Deity and man, outside the 
daily course of nature and experience." They are "an 
invasion of the known and common natural order from 
the side of the supernatural " {Nineteenth Century for 
May, 1888, pp. 177-178). 

President James McCosh, in Our Day, February num- 
ber, 1889, p. 147, writes: " A miracle is an event with 
God acting immediately as a cause" These two au- 
thorities speak of Scripture miracles, which they defend. 
His Eminence Cardinal Newman, as is well known, has 
written professedly a work on miracles. On page 7, 
ed. Pickering, London, 1873, he writes: " Miracles com- 
monly so called are such events — that is, for the most 
part — as are inconsistent with the constitution of the 
physical world.". Miracles according to these defini- 
tions, are not occurrences of the natural order ; they 
are outside of it, above it, supernatural, even when the 
facts might occur by some natural event, as the burst- 
ing out of water by the splitting of a rock ; the cause 
is what makes it a miracle, for the cause is God. 

We know of no book which so thoroughly shows 
the law of evidence as the New Testament. It records 
the words and the way of acting of Christ in bringing 
men to acknowledge his mission. It is, therefore, a most 
interesting study in psychology. His whole life im- 
pressed his followers and gained their implicit confi- 
dence ; he cited the prophecies regarding himself, and 
yet they did not fully comprehend ; indeed, " they un- 
derstood nothing of these things." But he had one 
means that did produce conviction and bring about 
belief ; which still remained a gift of God. He said to 
his disciples, St. John v. 36 : Ct The works which the 



a Thi7ig as a Miracle f 277 

Father hath given me to perfect : the works themselves, 
which I do, give testimony of me, that the Father hath 
sent me"; c. x. vv. 37, 38: "If I do not the works 
of my Father, believe me not"; v. 38: " But if I do, 
though you will not believe me, believe the works that 
I do." We may therefore supplement the above de- 
finitions by saying that a miracle is a sensible event or 
occurrence outside of the natural order, having for its 
author or cause God, and for its object to draw man to 
God directly or indirectly. That such is the character 
of the Scripture miracles no one can gainsay. Being 
occurrences of a sensible nature, to be perceived by the 
senses, they are subject to the ordinary rules of evidence 
that regard facts — such as are in use every day in the 
trial of criminal cases. It is a simple question, then, 
of fact. Did any one see it or not? If so, are the 
witnesses trustworthy ? If they are, then the fact must 
be admitted. It will not do for prejudice to endeavor 
to shut its eyes to such facts. They obstinately persist 
in being. It is hardly worthy of the gravity of the 
matter, but we cannot refrain from telling what we once 
heard narrated of an Illinois statesman. He was en- 
thusiastically propounding his views, when suddenly the 
hard-headed man in the crowd interrupted him with : 
" But, senator, the facts are against you." " So much 
the worse for the facts," was the reply. It will not do 
for Illinois statesmen nor any others to blind them- 
selves to facts. Men are inclined to follow the laws of 
their nature, and they will accept a fact once they are 
certain the witnesses are to be trusted ; while the will- 
fully blind will always be a small minority. The most 
complete answer to the assertion that miracles are im- 



278 



Can there be such 



possible in the past as in the present is the proof of a 
miraculous event itself, and we close this article with 
two such occurrences, one historical and the other of 
our day. 

One of the best known facts of history is the apos- 
tasy of the Emperor Julian from the Christian faith. 
He is known as Julian the Apostate. Cynical and full 
of hate against the Christians, whom he contemptuously 
styled Galileans, he used against them every influence 
at his command. In accordance with this policy, he 
turned against them the Jews, and showing the latter 
his favor, resolved to re-establish them at Jerusalem and 
rebuild the temple ; thus hoping to show groundless the 
predictions that told of the destruction of the temple 
and the dispersion of the people who had put Christ to 
death. These prophecies are briefly : Daniel ix. 26-27 ; 
and in the New Testament, Matthew xxiv. 2, Christ 
says to his disciples who came to show him the tem- 
ple: "Amen, I say to you, there shall not be left here 
a stone upon a stone that shall not be destroyed " ; 
Mark xiii. 2 : " There shall not be left a stone upon 
a stone that shall not be thrown down." The same 
words are found in Luke xxi. 6. Encouraged by Julian, 
the Jews set about the work with the greatest en- 
thusiasm, wealthy women contributing their jewels, and 
even carrying sand in the silken drapery that adorned 
their persons. The work was thorough, the foundations 
of the old temple still existing were torn up, and " not 
a stone was left upon a stone." They then set about 
building. What followed we may give in the words of 
the pagan Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus, whose 
testimony Gibbon himself declares to be " unexception- 



a Thing as a Miracle i 



279 



able " : " Whilst Alypius, assisted by the governor of 
the province, urged with vigor and diligence the execu- 
tion of the work, horrible balls of fire frequently breaking 
out near the foundations several times burned or scorched 
the workmen and rendered the place inaccessible. The 
terrible element continuing in this manner obstinately 
to repel every effort, the undertaking was abandoned " 
(Ammianus Marcellinus, b. xxiii. c. 1). The Christian 
writers of the period, the fathers and the ecclesi- 
astical historians, naturally do not fail to narrate in 
detail what a pagan historian deemed so worthy of 
mention as to record it. They tell of the luminous 
cross that appeared in the sky, and of the crosses that 
shone on the garments of people in Jerusalem. Gib- 
bon does not attempt to deny the fact ; but, as usual, 
he tries to destroy its weight by the remark that the 
" Roman historian, careless of theological disputes, might 
at a distance of twenty years adorn his work with the 
specious and splendid miracle." Sneers are not facts; 
this was a fact, and the friend and admirer of Julian 
would hardly have taken such a fact, that told of his 
failure, to adorn his pages with had it not been such a 
fact as struck the whole world and was on the lips of 
every one. Michaelis and Milman, following Gibbon, 
try to explain away the event by suppositions of fire- 
damp ; if they had lived till our day they would have 
said natural gas. That would have been a better at- 
tempt at explanation. But fire-damp and natural gas 
have a certain natural way of burning that admits of 
control. This fire defied control and foiled the em- 
peror, besides impressing all with the idea of a special 
intervention of Providence. Even were we to grant 



280 



Can there be such 



that the fire was from natural causes, the circumstances 
of the case make us see that a ruling Providence 
brought about the combination of natural causes which 
produced the fire and drove away the workmen. The 
event has the mark of miracle upon it ; for, besides 
being unusual and astonishing, it added strength to the 
faith, and led to God, who was the author of what 
fulfilled the words of his Divine Son. So great was 
the impression made on all, that this wonderful event 
may be said to have given the death-blow to pagan 
rule, for with Julian it disappeared from the Roman 
Empire for ever. 

But it may be more interesting to hear of a modern 
miracle. It may add to the interest to know that the 
writer has personally investigated what follows, has 
seen the man mentioned, and not only spoken with the 
witnesses, but examined and cross-questioned them, 
having gone into Belgium for the purpose, recom- 
mended to the cure of Jabbeke, the Abbe Slock, by a 
Belgian prelate of high position. The 16th of Febru- 
ary, 1874, Pierre de Rudder, living near Jabbeke, had 
his leg broken by the fall of a tree upon it. The 
tibia and the fibula were both broken at about the 
junction of their middle and lower thirds, say about 
five inches above the ankle. During ten years seven 
physicians tried to cure him. He would never allow 
the limb to be cut off. There was no bone lost, but 
there was in April, 1875, a suppurating wound about 
an inch and a half to two inches in width, which per- 
mitted the ends of the bones to be seen, separated 
about three centimetres. What was worse, the wound 
was infested with gnawing worms, which, on the 7th of 



a Thing as a Miracle ? 



281 



April of this same year, 1875, he tried to kill by put- 
ting on an oak-bark poultice. He could bend the 
lower part of the tibia at an angle to its upper part, 
and could turn the foot around and put the heel in 
front; as a witness put it, " les orteils par derriere." 
As a matter of course, his only means of movement was 
a pair of crutches. Humanly speaking, the case was 
hopeless. But De Rudder looked for help from above. 
He was sure Our Lady of Lourdes would cure him. 
So on the 7th of April, 1876, he went to Ghent, and 
thence to Oostaker near by, where, on the grounds of 
the Marquise de Courtebonne, there was an imitation 
of the Grotto of Lourdes with a statute of Our Lady. 
It was while praying here that, day that Pierre de 
Rudder was instantly cured, and he was seen walking 
about, without any crutches or support, by two hundred 
people that evening on his return to Jabbeke. His 
little son did not recognize his father, because he 
missed the crutches, and after his father had reached 
his home and was seated, telling of what occurred, see- 
ing his father rise up suddenly, fearing he might fall, 
he cried out in terror: "Father, your crutches!" 

This is a fact the truth of which the writer vouches 
for, having already published an extended account of 
it. It is also given with more detail by M. l'Abbe 
Emile ScheerKnck, of Ghent, in his "Lourdes en Flandre." 
If such facts as these two have and do occur, is not 
Prof. Green too hasty in discarding miracle ? Are the 
theories of this gentleman and of the school to which 
he belongs to be looked on as well grounded when 
such facts contradict them ? And on such a fanciful 
basis are we to reject the great fact of the Resurrec- 



282 Can there be such a Thing as a Miracle ? 



tion ? of which St. Paul does not speak in a spiritual 
sense, but in a most realistic sense of an absolute ris- 
ing from the tomb of the man Christ, whose death had 
been officially recognized by the Roman governor Pilate, 
and who had appeared to the apostles. I. Cor., XV. 
3-8, St. Paul writes: (< Christ died for our sins accord- 
ing to the Scriptures : he was buried : he rose again 
the third day : he was seen by Cephas, after that by 
the eleven ; then by more than five hundred brethren 
at once; after that by James; then by all the apostles; 
last of all also by me, as by one born out of time." 
How, with such words before him, with the other 
numerous passages of the Bible that refer to the fact, 
Prof. Green could have done away with the real bodily 
Resurrection of Christ, can be explained only by the 
firmness of his conviction of its impossibilty, equaled 
only by the strength of his desire to preserve all the 
beautiful effects of that Resurrection which constitute 
the Christian life — Christianity. His mental condition 
is very instructive ; it reveals to us the mystery of 
self-deception, against which even honesty, it would 
seem, is impotent. It should make us more and more 
fearful of ourselves, and thankful that there is, not- 
withstanding, the authority of the Christian religion to 
guide us in what St. Peter calls "the dark place" of 
this world. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



XVII. 



THE TEMPORAL POWER OF THE POPE. 

{The Catholic World, November, 1889.) 

THERE is a logical sequence in events and a very 
inexorable one. If we make a mistake, we must 
take the consequences ; if we willfully do wrong, we shall 
suffer for it. The principle is one of universal applica- 
tion, and the question just now is whether the Masonic 
conspiracy, which compassed the downfall of the Tem- 
poral Power, and brought it about in September, 1889, 
did not make a very colossal mistake, and is not at 
this very moment hurrying downward in the logical 
course which will make it fall over the precipice. We 
are of the opinion that this is so. The campaign of 
Cavour and his abettors and allies, Mazzini and the 
Masons of Italy, was entered on with reliance on 
" moral force " — La forza morale. This moral force 
was. to sweep away opposition. It was to consist in 
the force of public opinion, which was to be sedulously, 
cautiously and with great tact, directed against the 
pope's temporal dominion and against the church to 
the cry : Una chiesa libera in uno stato libero — " A 
free church in a free state." The press and the tele- 
graph were secured, and misrepresentation was the order 

283 



284 



The Temporal Power 



of the day ; so that public opinion was manufactured 
and presented daily for the complacent assent of all 
whose early education taught them to look on Rome 
as the symbol of oppression in religious belief 

The Italians have a saying : La bugia ha le gambe 
cortc — " A lie has short legs " — and a very true saying 
it turned out to be in this case. This misrepresenta- 
tion of the real state of things in Rome has been try- 
ing to keep ahead ; but in these days of pedestrianism 
the truth is catching up, and the moral force of the 
world and of public opinion seems to be taking a 
direction that will bring retribution on those who de- 
spoiled Pope Pius IX. of his lawful authority. The 
great mistake the revolutionists made was in thinking 
their " moral force " would meet with no opposition ; 
they thought from their reliance on freemasonry that 
they would have the support of the world, freemasonry 
having spread so widely, and controlling not only cabi- 
nets and monarchs, but the press, the great power of 
the nineteenth century. What could the pope do 
against this ? When to moral force were added the 
wily diplomacy of Cavour and Ratazzi, .the plots and 
intrigues of Mazzini, the acquiescence of Napoleon, the 
free corps of Garibaldi, and the cannon of Cadorno and 
Bixio, success was certain ; and once gained, Rome 
could easily be held. And so, when they got into the 
city of the popes, gazing on the trophies of antiquity 
and art of the most famous city of the world and de- 
lighted with the sight, they complacently sat down and 
exclaimed : Hie manebimus optime. But they reckoned 
without their host ; they were in the pope's house. 
They did not think of his " moral force," which has two 



of the Pope. 



285 



elements that make it well-nigh omnipotent : first, the 
truth, and, secondly, the opportunity to make the truth 
known. It was a tremendous mistake on their part ; 
so we must not be surprised to see the subsequent 
career of the despoilers of the pope marked by unmis- 
takable signs of that folly which leads to ruin. To 
enumerate these signs would be to go over the whole 
history of Rome since its capture by the Italian army. 

There is one thing to be said in favor of the royal 
house of Savoy : the father of the present king went to 
Rome against his will and better judgment, and the 
present king is not responsible for being there ; for he 
did not create the circumstances by which he has been 
surrounded, and, as a constitutional ruler, he is power- 
less to alter the condition of things without the con- 
sent of the legislative bodies who, through the minis- 
ters, govern the land. Both he and his father have 
always tried to have public order preserved, and the 
safety of the sovereign pontiff" secured. But this said, 
pretty much all is said that can be urged in extenua- 
tion of the presence of the king in the city of the 
popes. The course of the parliament has been marked 
always by the spirit of undying hatred of the Church 
of God which characterizes freemasonry in Europe, 
and more or less its affiliations everywhere. Suppres- 
sion of religious orders ; seizure of monasteries and 
ecclesiastical revenues ; forced sale of church property — 
the price not paid in cash, but by public securities at 
five per cent., with an income tax of 1 3 t 2 oV per cent. ; — 
these and kindred acts ending lately in the Draconian 
Penal Code against the clergy, which is to go into effect 
on January 1, 1890, have marked the delirium of enmity 



286 



The Temporal Power 



to the church from which the legislators of the Italian 
kingdom have suffered. 

As an illustration of their deep scheme of persecu- 
tion, and of their throttling of freedom of speech, Ave 
give the following extracts from the code just named : 

Art. 182 says: " The minister of worship who, in the exercise 
of his functions, publicly blames or belittles the institutions, the 
laws of the state, or the acts of authority, is punished with im- 
prisonment not longer than a year, and by fine not exceeding 
one thousand francs." Art. 183: "The minister of worship who, 
making" use of his position, excites others to contemn the institu- 
tions, the laws, the dispositions of authority, or to disobey the 
laws, the dispositions of authority, or to neglect duties inherent 
in a public office, is punished with imprisonment from three 
months to two years, by a fine of from five hundred to three 
thousand francs, and by perpetual or temporary privation of his 
ecclesiastical revenues. If the fact take place publicly, he may be 
imprisoned three years." *" The same penalty may be inflicted 
on a minister of worship who, making use of his position, com- 
pels or induces any one to acts or declarations contrary to the 
laws, or prejudicial to the rights acquired under these laws." 
Art. 104: "Whoever commits an act directed to the placing of 
the state or a part of it under the dominion of a foreigner, or to 
diminishing its independence, or to breaking up its unity, is 
punished with imprisonment." 

The fear of the movement going on in Italy for the 
restoration of the temporal power has driven the law- 
givers of the kingdom to enact these tyrannical laws to 
punish the priest or bishop who, in the discharge of 
his duty, is bound to condemn laws that are anti- 
Christian, and public acts which violate the sacred 
rights and liberty of the successor of St. Peter, or 
destroy- the influence over his people of him whom all 
Catholics regard and believe to be the Vicar of Christ. 



of the Pope. 



287 



These laws are an answer to the demonstrations which 
were evoked by the wonderful Jubilee of Pope Leo 
XIIL, in which, we may say, all the sovereigns and 
peoples of the earth joined. The moral force of the 
Papacy has at last caught up with the " moral force " 
of the Revolution, and these laws show that spirit of 
desperation which confesses the imminence of defeat. 

But of all events which have occurred to show the 
hatred and fear of the power of the pope, not only as 
a claimant of the temporal power but as head of the 
Catholic Church, the late apotheosis of the pantheist 
Giordano Bruno, in Rome, as a counter demonstration 
against the Pope's Jubilee, and against revealed re- 
ligion, towers above all for the manner in which the 
whole infidel world was invited to take part in it, and 
by the way it did so by subscriptions to pay for the 
statue and by the actual presence of representatives. 
It finds its parallel only in the so-called Feast of 
Reason in the French Revolution, when a courtesan, as 
Goddess of Reason, was installed in the cathedral of 
Notre Dame, in Paris. This public worship of Giordano 
Bruno has served to arouse the attention of Catholics 
the world over, and make them realize that the battle 
going on in Rome is between freemasonry and the 
religion of Christ, and see that the time has come to 
raise their voice against this state of things, and claim 
for the Pope his temporal power, of which he has been 
wrongfully despoiled, and which alone can save him 
and the Church of Rome from the present deplorable 
condition of things. Let us hear what the Holy Father 
himself has to say on this demonstration of his enemies. 
In his allocution, pronounced to the cardinals on the 



288 The Temporal Power 



30th of June last, he tells what occurred, facts which have 
already been made known through the press. 

The Holy Father begins by saying that after the 
taking of Rome by the present government, our holy 
religion and the Apostolic See have been subjected to 
a long series of acts of injustice, but that the secret 
societies intend shortly to do worse things which 
hitherto they were not able to accomplish. They have 
obstinately determined to impose upon the chief city 
of Catholicity a rule of distinctively profane character 
and one of impiety, directing against this citadel of 
the faith the hatred of the world. He then illustrates 
this by the fact of the erection of the statue to Gior- 
dano Bruno in Rome. " Of a truth," he says, " as if 
they had not brought about ruin enough during these 
past years, see how they try to outdo themselves in 
audacity, and on one of the holiest days in the Chris- 
tian year they erect in public a monument by which a 
spirit of contumacy towards the church is commended 
to posterity ; and assert their will to wage a decisive 
war with the Catholic faith." " They honor a man 
twice a fugitive, judicially convicted of heresy, whose 
pertinacity against the church ended only with his last 
breath. In fact it was exactly for this that they gave 
him distinction." " He had no remarkable knowledge ; 
for his writings show him to have been a pantheist 
and materialist entangled in common errors, and not 
seldom in contradiction with himself." " He was not a 
virtuous man, but a very bad one ; a man of no public 
merit, but deceitful, mendacious, selfish, intolerant of 
others, a flatterer, of abject mind and evil disposition. 
The scope of these honors to such a man, the language 



of the Pope. 



289 



describing them is this : life is to be led without regard 
to revelation, and the minds of men are to be entirely 
emancipated from the power of Jesus Christ. This aim 
of those who honored Bruno is the same as that of 
the secret societies which are striving to alienate whole 
peoples from God, and fight with infinite hate and 
unceasing strife against the church and the Roman 
pontificate." " That this insult might be the more 
marked and its cause more widely known, they re- 
solved to celebrate the dedication with great pomp and 
with a great concourse of people. During those days 
Rome saw within her walls a multitude of no mean 
proportions called hither from everywhere ; banners 
most hostile to religion impudently carried about ; and, 
what is especially revolting, there were not wanting 
some with figures of the evil one, who refused to be 
subject to the Most High in heaven, the prince of the 
seditious and the instigator of all rebellions. To this 
wicked crime was added the insolence of the speeches 
delivered and of the articles in the press, in which the 
holiness of what is most sacred was made a jest of 
without shame and without measure, while that lawless 
freedom of thought was vehemently extolled which is 
the fertile source of evil opinions, and which shakes 
the foundation of discipline and of civil order while 
striking at Christian morality. This sad work was al- 
lowed to be prepared long before, and perfected, those 
who are in authority not only knowing it, but con- 
tinually and openly giving it favor and incitement. It 
is a sad thing to say, and like unto a portent, that 
the praise of reason rebelling against God should be 
heralded from this fostering city of the faith in which 



290 The Temporal Power of the Pope. 

God has placed his vicar to dwell ; and, whence the 
whole world is wont to seek the uncorrupted precepts 
of the Gospel and counsels of salvation, there, by an 
evil change, foul errors and heresy itself are consecrated 
with monuments. To this have the times led that we 
should see the abomination of desolation in the holy 
place.'" 

We do not wish to detract from the eloquence and 
power of the representation of the Holy Father in this 
remarkable allocution by any comment of ours. What 
is here said shows unmistakably the state of things and 
the nature of the " hostile domination " under which 
the pope lives. For Catholics everywhere the contest 
is for their home— /rf avis et focis. The determined 
foe is there, and he must be put out. The sovereign 
pontiff claims his liberty and independence through the 
temporal power, and more than once the voices of the 
episcopate and of the noble-hearted Catholic laity have 
re-echoed his words. Our duty is to aid him as we 
may, and since it may not be possible for us to help 
in any other way, we should contribute to strengthen 
by our prayers, our sympathy, and our words of 
loyalty that moral force which is rising like a tidal 
wave, in its own moment to do the augean work of 
cleansing the chosen citadel of the faith of what now 
defiles it. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



XVIII. 



ARE CATHOLICS RIGHT? 



(American Catholic Quartei'ly Review, July, 1890.) 

HE above question it is opportune to ask regarding 



1 the position of Catholics on the ever-important 
subject of discussion, the schools. It is especially op- 
portune at this time, in view of the very strong feeling 
against Catholics in certain quarters, and of the viru- 
lent attacks made on them, with more force of words 
than wealth of wisdom. Hardly a day goes by with- 
out our being treated to some unfavorable criticism, in 
which Catholics are accused of being disloyal, and hos- 
tile to the best interests of our country, because they 
do not send their children to the public schools, and 
persist in building their own school-houses, and in edu- 
cating their children as they conscientiously believe 
they ought to. Who is right, our critics or we ? This 
is the question we propose to answer. 

Before we answer it, let us not be misunderstood. 
We admire exceedingly the zeal for education every- 
where manifested amid our people ; for education is the 
process by which man's mind is to acquire the truth — 
its connatural object and food — and by which the heart 
is to be directed to the attainment of all that is good, 
which it seeks by the tendency placed in it by the 

291 




292 



Are Catholics Right? 



Creator. This zeal is everywhere to be met with ; in 
the village, in the large city, and in important meetings 
of educators, in which able teachers compare their views, 
the proceedings of which we not only read with in- 
terest but often find valuable suggestions. 

We are in sympathy with all these workers in the 
great cause. It is often a source of great pleasure to us 
when we find, as we have more than once, these clever 
people coming so closely to the systems our Catholic 
forefathers approved, and advocating, after long expe- 
rience, the methods which have made the great and 
learned scholars of the past. Among these we may 
note the condemnation of putting any strain upon the 
intellect of tender childhood ; the cultivation of the 
memory ; simplicity in early instruction ; the modera- 
tion to be observed in the number of studies, and in 
the amount ; the explanation by the teacher of what is 
difficult before the child is made to learn it ; the in- 
culcation of the importance of not letting the pupil pass 
further on till he thoroughly knows what he is engaged 
on ; the importance of following nature, and of not re- 
quiring what is above capacity ; the grading of classes, 
and other like measures which an experienced teacher 
finds suggested to him by the circumstances of the case. 
In all such investigations the friends of education will 
find Catholic educators interested co-workers ; and we 
doubt whether any of them could write as learnedly 
and as correctly on the subject as the distinguished 
member of the Order of the Brothers of the Christian 
Schools, Brother Azarias, in his recent article in the 
Ecclesiastical Record, of Philadelphia. We feel especi- 
ally indebted to him for what he says of Blessed de 



Are Catholics Right? 



293 



la Salle, the founder of that Order ; and of St. Joseph 
Calasanctius, the founder of the Order of the Fathers 
of the Pious Schools. The former of these two illus- 
trious and saintly educators of the children of the 
people, flourished in the latter part of the seventeenth 
century ; the latter antedated him by fifty years. 
Before Raikes had begun his Sunday schools, these 
had been doing far better ; and with a century and a 
half start of him, certainly the Catholic Church is ahead 
of other churches in this race ; and, strange as it may 
sound to prejudiced ears, is ahead in higher education ; 
though we willingly grant that the United States has 
outstripped all other nations in the general, ordinary 
education of the child, defective though it be in the 
most important point ; but of this presently. 

To make our answer more intelligible, we must call 
attention to the state of the educational problem at 
the present time. Owing to a condition of things 
which the present generation did not bring about but 
must accept as it is, there exists a very wide- spread 
difference of opinion on all points, especially that of 
religion, in meeting the general need of education. 
This conflict of ideas has led the majority in this 
country to look upon a school system from which 
religious education must be excluded as an absolute 
necessity. We think it but fair to attribute this to 
honest conviction, however much we regard it as 
a mistake. There are other and subtle influences at 
work to make this idea more far reaching and perma- 
nent, and of these we shall speak. 

The feature to which we first call attention, is the 
tendency which the system displays to supersede the 



294 



A re Catholics Right f 



duty of parents, to usurp their rights, to make the 
state the supreme disposer, if not owner, of the child. 
Herein lies a most serious and fatal error. What the 
state is for is not to supersede individual right, but to 
safeguard right, and never to hold rights in abeyance 
unless the public good call for such action. Rights are 
sacred things, especially those natural rights which the 
genius of our American institutions teaches us to re- 
gard as inalienable. All government, legitimately in- 
stituted on a foundation of justice, has its authority 
from God, who gave those natural rights. It must, 
therefore, represent Him, and, representing Him, must 
not contradict Him by depriving the citizen or subject 
of the rights the Creator implanted in man's nature. 
Hence the proper object of all legislation is to protect 
right, and the decisions of the Supreme Court look 
to the rights of individuals and of the States as 
defined by the limitations of the Constitution, and thus 
safeguard liberty. In the logical order right comes 
first, because inherent in man ; while a state becomes 
possible only by an aggregation of men. This makes 
evident the gross error those commit who worship the 
state, make it everything, and, like Hegel, exclaim, 
" The state is the really present God." Making a god 
of the state is the death of liberty ; and against any 
such assumption it becomes American manhood to rise 
in just indignation. We, of all others, knowing that 
our liberty rests, and must rest, on justice, should be 
ready to give willing obedience to the authority which God 
has bestowed on men, and as ready to resist the abuse of 
authority, and oppose the hurtful measures of shortsighted 
or malicious men proposed in the name of authority. 



Are Catholics Right? 



295 



Among these inherent rights is most assuredly the 
right of the parent to his child ; a natural right, for it 
has its foundation in the fact of birth. The parent, 
therefore, is the owner of his child, and this owner- 
ship, when rightfully exercised, has no limit but the 
right of the Creator. This right involves the right of 
the parent to educate his child in his duties to his 
Creator, and to do so is an obligation inherent in the 
parent, who must discharge it according to his con- 
science. Any interference with this is a violation of 
the rights of conscience. It may be answered that 
there is no intention to do this, to interfere with such 
sacred natural right of the parent in having a state 
system of education. But, when the system is, 
practically, godless, and rears a generation without 
knowledge of God and of Christian morality — which 
cannot be taught apart from religion — it is idle to dis- 
S claim any such intention ; the result is too patent, and 
shows the mistake. Parents who are religious, whether 
Catholic, Lutheran, Episcopalian, or Methodist, are 
justified in agitating in favor of religious training, and, 
because they cannot have it in the public school, are 
fully justified in establishing schools of their own. 
They are simply exercising their own God- given right, 
and protesting against a violation of it. 

But there are equally grave, if not graver, reasons 
for the action which looks to the vindication of this 
parental right. It requires no great foresight to 
understand that whoever can control the education of 
the child will have him in his maturer years ; who 
has the child will have the man. This is so well 
appreciated that it forms part of the programme of 



296 



Are Catholics Right? 



naturalism which, in Europe, seeks to destroy the 
idea of revealed religion. Recently, a very bold and 
impudent move in this direction has been set on foot 
by the freemasons of Italy, and a circular has been 
sent out by them through the length and breadth of 
the land, commanding their followers to seize on and 
hold possession of elementary education, and supporting 
this command by the presentation of the grounds upon 
which it is based. Considering the affiliation of free- 
masonry in the United States with that of Europe, is 
it idle to suppose a common purpose, and a word of 
order passed from mouth to mouth to cripple and 
destroy the influence of divine revelation in the 
school ? Some of the men who took part in the 
Giordano Bruno celebration are prominent in their 
hostility to religious training in the public school, and 
the German " Turners " have lately thrown their weight 
in the balance in favor of the Republican scheme to 
interfere with the German parochial schools of Wis- 
consin. It will repay the trouble of watching the 
utterances of the masonic press of the country ; we do 
not think we risk anything in saying that the masonic 
press will be found to a unit in favor of what has 
been termed " the Godless system of elementary edu- 
cation." 

It seems to us that a further insight into the details 
of the system of public-school education in this coun- 
try will throw additional light on this subject. At the 
head of the Bureau of Education, at Washington, has 
been placed a gentleman of ability, but of well-known 
pantheistic ideas, Prof. W. T. Harris, A.M., LL.D., of 
the Concord School. This gentleman was in the habit 



Are Catholics Rig Jit? 



297 



of lecturing on philosophic subjects at Indianapolis and 
at Terre Haute, Indiana. Having, it would seem, no 
one to counteract his hurtful opinions, he spread them 
widely, so that the Indianapolis Journal called atten- 
tion to the fact that the normal schools of these two 
cities were saturated with pantheistic teachings. Prof. 
Harris went to the well-springs and poisoned them. 
He perverted the teachers, and the children confided to 
them will be poisoned too. Latterly the professor, 
active in his work and "wise in his generation," has 
made use of the influence of the position which politi- 
cal favor has given him, and has edited the " Inter- 
national Educational Series," one of which, Rosen- 
cranz's "Philosophy of Education," with a preface by 
him, and also a commentary on the whole, which is 
designed for the work of instructing teachers, is before us. 

In this work, Prof. Harris informs us of " the stub- 
born individuality of the martyrs" (p. 249). On page 
250 he tells us: "All external authority should be 
cancelled in the self-rule of spirit, which is a law unto 
itself. The divine authority of the truth of the in- 
dividual will is to be recognized, but at the same time 
freed from its estrangement toward itself. While Christ 
was a Jew, and obedient to the divine law, he knew 
himself as the universal man who determines to him- 
self his own destiny; and although distinguishing God, 
as subject, from himself, yet holds fast to the unity of 
man and God. The system of humanitarian education 
began to unfold from this principle, which no longer 
accords the highest place to the natural unity of 
national individuality, nor to abstract obedience to the 
command of God, but to that freedom of soul which 



298 



Are Catholics Right? 



knows itself to be unconditioned by aught in time or 
space." 

Page 254 he tells us Protestantism is "a necessary 
element of Christianity," and " Monachism (the relig- 
ious life of the monk) has a defect as measured by 
the entire scope of Christianity; it re-named the world 
instead of conquering it"; it was, he says, "the 
mechanism of a thoughtless subjection to rule." 

Page 255-6, Prof. Harris declares: " Christian mon- 
achism resembles in many of its forms that of Buddh- 
ism. Their vows, poverty, chastity and obedience, 
indicate the attitude towards the secular world. The 
three chief secular institutions : (a) the family is attacked 
by the second vow, which aims at celibacy ; (b) civil 
society, or the institution for the production and dis- 
tribution of property, is attacked by the first vow, 
which renounces property ; (c) the state is attacked by 
the third vow, which renounces allegiance to any but 
its religious superiors." 

We close our citations from this book by the follow- 
ing language at the expense of the Jesuit educators: 
"The most deliberate hypocrisy and pleasure in intrigue 
merely for the sake of intrigue, this subtlest poison of 
moral corruption were the result. Jesuitism had not 
only an interest in the material profit which, when it 
had corrupted souls, fell to its share, but it also had an 
interest in the educative process of corruption. With 
absolute indifference as to the idea of morality, and 
absolute indifference to the moral quality of the means 
used to attain its end, it rejoiced in the efficacy of 
secrecy and the accomplished and calculating under- 
standing, and deceiving the credulous by means of its 



Are Catholics Right? 



299 



graceful, seemingly scrupulous moral language." " Peni- 
tence and contrition were transformed into a perfect 
materialism of outward actions, and hence arose the 
punishments of the Order, in which fasting, scourging, 
imprisonment, mortification and death were formed into 
a mechanical artificial system." 

We will not tire the reader with matter of this 
nature further. It shows sufficiently what kind of in- 
fluence is at the helm of the public elementary educa 
tion of the United States. 

There was placed in our hands some time ago a 
list of questions to be answered at a " teachers' insti- 
tute " in Southern Indiana. They were mostly taken 
from Carlyle's " Heroes and Hero-worship." No one 
will deny the rugged sincerity of Carlyle nor his abil- 
ity. But are his views on subjects vital to us to be 
taken as matter of examination on which Catholic 
teachers are to answer, and which the teachers in gen- 
eral are to have held up to them as their principles in 
educating Catholic youth? Luther he lauds as humble 
and peaceable ; Tetzel " plies a scandalous trade in Indul- 
gences," in consequence of which Luther's penitents 
tell him in the confessional that " they had already got 
their sins pardoned;" while Leo X. "seems to have been 
a pagan." " Popehood has become untrue The thing 
is untrue ; we were traitors against the Giver of all 
truth, if we durst pretend to think it true." Swinton's 
book can take its place alongside of this. The Boston 
Committee of One Hundred must be happy. It is all 
about as reliable as what they put forth. One of their 
latest publications is by the Rev. Mr. Dunn, in which 
he makes an onslaught upon the church, and quotes. 



3°° 



Are Catholics Right? 



"Schouppe's Manual," as claiming for her a power of 
dispensing from the laws of the state. On looking at 
Schouppe's words we find he is speaking of dispensa- 
tion from ecclesiastical law, and cites degrees of Coun- 
cils to show this, as is perfectly proper. Thus we see 
continual misrepresentation at work among those hold- 
ing power to injure the Catholic Church, warp the 
mind of American youth, and destroy the respect of 
Catholics for their faith. 

Is it strange, then, that we say most positively that 
Catholics are right in their attitude as respects the 
public schools ? It would be passing wonderful if they 
took any other ; it would be a mark of moral decay, 
of waning vitality, did they not protest in the vigorous 
way in which they do, and will continue to do, claim- 
ing unhesitatingly and persistently their just rights. 

But let us say a word to strengthen our position, and 
not content ourselves merely with a denial of the as- 
sumptions of our adversaries, or with rejecting their 
schemes. 

It is well known that the Catholic prelates in the 
United States have recognized the need of Catholic 
schools, and have passed decrees to bring about every- 
where the erection of parish schools. The principle 
upon which they acted we find very ably proclaimed 
by the distinguished Archbishop of Dublin, Most Rev. 
Dr. Walsh, in a discourse on the 7th of last November, 
at the Medical School of the Catholic University. 
There is not enough difference in the state of things 
in Ireland and in America to make what the Most 
Rev. Archbishop says inapplicable in any way to our 
case here. We quote copiously, that there may be 



Are Catholics Right? 



301 



no danger of misunderstanding the position of his 
Grace. 

''When Trinity College was, in a sense, secularized in 1873, the 
position of Catholics in reference to the three Queen's colleges 
then existing in Ireland was thoroughly well understood. The 
fundamental principle of the system of education embodied in 
those colleges was one that made it impossible to regard them as 
a provision for university education, available in any practical 
sense, for the Catholics of Ireland. Save in some special and 
exceptional circumstances, it could not be considered open to 
Catholics. I speak now, of course, of Catholics who are suffi- 
ciently instructed in the nature of the obligations to which they 
are subject as Catholics, and who are also conscientiously desirous 
of fulfilling these obligations. Of such Catholics, I say, it could 
not be considered really open to them to make use of the advan- 
tages which the state, through these well-endowed colleges, placed 
fully and freely within the reach of the members of every Protes- 
tant denomination in Ireland. The reason of this is obvious. To 
us Catholics it comes as a matter of fixed principle that every 
such institution, embodying that which is known as the ' mixed ' 
system, is from the nature of that system, a source of danger to 
Catholic students, if they frequent it: a source of danger, in the 
first place, to the vigor and even to the integrity of their faith ; a 
source of danger also to their constancy in the full and faithful 
observance of the practical duties by which they are bound as 
Catholics. That is what we mean by the expression dangerous 
to faith and morals. That is what the church has always meant, 
as often as she has, under that severe censure, condemned as places 
of education for Catholics, institutions such as the Queen's col- 
leges, whether existing in Ireland or in any other portion of the 
universal church. 

"Even if no such condemnation had been issued, common sense 
would have sufficed to warn us of the danger. Let me quote to 
you a noteworthy expression of a former venerated member of our 
Irish Episcopacy— Dr. Moriarty, formerly Bishop of Kerry. In a 
letter to one of the numerous commissioners that from time to 
time have sat in Ireland to examine and report upon our public 
educational institutions, Dr. Moriarty wrote as follows of the official 



Are Catholics Right? 



Training College of the National Board in Marlborough Street. 
His severe strictures upon that college as a place of ' mixed ' edu- 
cation for our school-teachers are, as you will observe, quite applic- 
able to the case of ' mixed ' colleges of university education. Dr. 
Moriarty, in fact, himself remarks that this is so. Here is what 
he wrote : ' The condemnation of the Queen's colleges by the 
highest authority in the church necessitated the condemnation of 
the Training College by the bishops. The cases are perfectly 
parallel.' " 

Then he goes on to explain that the case is different 
from that of a school attended by children who are 
engaged in learning merely the rudiments of knowl- 
edge, such as reading, writing and arithmetic, especially 
as they meet only for a few hours of the day at school, 
and for the rest of their time are under parental con- 
trol. In their case he says, " the dangers of the mixed 
system may be comparatively remote." You will ob- 
serve he does not say that even in such a case these 
dangers disappear. He says merely that they may in 
such cases be comparatively remote ; " but," he goes 
on to say, speaking of colleges of higher education : 

" there is danger of that suppression of truth, and of that con- 
cealment of religious profession and observance, which necessarily 
lead to religious indifference. The danger- is manifestly greatest 
for those who believe most. If Anglicans were associated under 
such circumstances with Unitarians or Socinians, the necessity of 
avoiding topics of discussion would bring them down to the lower 
level. The shortest rule of faith would become the common de- 
nominator." 

The Archbishop goes on to speak of the system as 
" intrinsically " dangerous : " The danger exists alto- 
gether independently of any conscious effort at perver- 
sion. It is a danger inherent in the very nature of 



Are Catholics Right f 



303 



the ' mixed ' system as worked out among youth in 
such a place of education. And this is what the 
Catholic Church means when she condemns that sys- 
tem as 1 intrinsically ' dangerous to faith and to fidelity 
in the fulfillment of Catholic duty." (p. 21.) Else- 
where Archbishop Walsh remarks that education under 
such auspices " takes the edge off a man's Catholicity." 
We heartily re-echo the expression ; the Archbishop 
tells a great truth in those words. 

These passages apply with equal, if not with greater 
force, to the state of education in this country; and 
this for various reasons. We have ostensibly no dis- 
crimination against Catholics. In reality there are and 
always have been, the atmosphere, the teachers and 
the books — all Protestant or un- Catholic. We say 
teachers, too, because until lately the proportion of 
Catholic teachers has been very small, and we greatly 
fear, except in rare cases, " the edge was taken off 
their Catholicity " before they were allowed to teach 
secular science ; but nothing Catholic. In one of the 
schools of this diocese the Catholic teacher was told 
by the petty county supervisor she was not to men- 
tion the name of God in the school. In another 
school the Catholic teacher was told to take the cru- 
cifix out of the school-room. We suppose this is 
strictly in accordance with " non-sectarianism ; " which 
makes it all the more objectionable to Catholics. 

A further danger from this kind of teacher is that 
public-school teachers are simply required to stand 
the examination, and prove their title to a good 
character. But this is not enough for one who is to 
take the place of a parent and watch over the chil- 



304 Are Catholics Right? 



dren. Here is a vital point. The teacher will con- 
sider his work done when he has taught ; but the 
recreation and the recess, and absence from the school- 
room, frequently unavoidable, give the children a 
freedom too often fatal. Then there is the further 
insuperable objection and fatal error of the education 
of children, in which the theory is, that the gentle- 
ness of the girl softens the ruggedness of the boy — 
but at the expense of both. Any expert physician 
can give you an interesting lecture on the physical 
effects of such a system. Besides the indisputable 
physical effects of acts against the moral code, there 
have been frequent exposures of moral disorders in 
these schools. Look at the recent Cleveland sensa- 
tion in this respect; it is not the most recent known 
to us, however. It has been said that the standard 
of female virtue has been greatly lowered. We are 
afraid this is so, and it is not going to improve under 
the prevailing system of public education. We know 
perfectly well that experience shows absolute preven- 
tion of vice among children to be impossible ; but it 
can and ought to be reduced to the least amount. The 
public school system, however, will not effect this. 
Add to this the perverted system of morality taught ; 
perverted because divorced from religion, and falling 
back on aesthetic ideas. A teacher with whom we 
were conversing some time ago remarked : " This 
teaching children to avoid evil because not beautiful, 
but ugly, deformed ; this making beauty a standard 
of good, has the effect on me of causing me to lose 
sight of distinctions between good and evil as taught 
by religion." It is a fact that a confessor has to 



Are Catholics Right? 305 

fight against a tendency, in those who come in con- 
tact with the public school influence, to look on cer- 
tain sins against .nature, Malthusian theories and secret 
indulgence, as no harm at all. A very brief ex- 
perience in any large city will prove this. It is the 
reason why so many non- Catholics send their chil- 
dren" to the schools taught by the religious orders 
and by Catholic lay teachers under the surveillance 
of the priest. 

On the other hand we are fully convinced that many 
upright and earnest teachers are teaching in the pub- 
lic schools, and many pupils attending them are of 
exemplary life, and with the modesty they learned 
under the parents' roof. But everything is handi- 
capped by the want of the restraining influence of 
religion, and secret immorality is on the increase. 

To sum up then the grounds of our auswer, we say 
that Catholics are right in their attitude on the school 
question ; in asserting the necessity of denominational 
schools, and in claiming as due to Catholics, in jus- 
tice, a corresponding portion of the school fund, or, 
what is equivalent to that, exemption from taxation for 
schools ; because of the intrinsic defect of a system that 
excludes religion ; because of the hurtful anti-religious and 
anti- Catholic influence at the helm, both in the normal 
school and in the institute ; because of the influence 
of freemasonry against religion, and of its scheme 
to possess itself of elementary education ; because of the 
judgment of the church, as expressed by able bishops, 
and by councils, declaring such a system intrinsically 
dangerous to faith and morals, which cannot be 
taught and maintained apart from religion ; because 



306 



Are Catholics Right ? 



even expert physicians tell us of the evils of the sys- 
tem of co-education of children of different sexes — 
apart from acts of immorality ; because of the well- 
known frequency of scandals among the children ; and 
lastly, because the moral ideas of Catholic children 
become perverted, so that they come to look on sins 
against nature as no harm. 

These grounds are more than enough to justify and 
strengthen Catholics in standing firmly to their prin- 
ciples. We say this all the more emphatically because 
we are persuaded that our American people wish for 
the best ; and did they believe what we have writ- 
ten above, would undoubtedly take the movement 
for denominational education under the patronage of 
their good will, and carry it through triumphantly ; at 
least for all who want denominational education ; and 
we venture to say that every American parent who 
knows the world, on opening his eyes to the real state 
of things, would want it. More than once we have 
been obliged reluctantly to decline to receive the chil- 
dren of non-Catholic parents in our Catholic schools 
for want of room or for other reasons that made the 
decisions imperative. For it has happened, not sel- 
dom, that as a last resort, a non-Catholic parent, in 
his desperation, has put his child, ruined by the free- 
dom of the public school, in some Catholic institution 
or parochial school, placing his last hope in the in- 
influence of Catholic education 

Of a truth, that influence is wholesome. The child 
comes from home bright and cheerful, sure to meet a 
smiling, motherly face. A few moments of play under 
the watchful eye of the teacher, whose highest motive 



Are Catholics Right? 



307 



is to help save that soul and form a useful member of 
society and of God's household, here and hereafter. 
The bell summons to Mass ; the day's work is begun 
by prayer, the greatest of all, the Holy Sacrifice, 
which appeals to the faith and love of the child. 
Prayer to the Holy Mother of God directs the thought 
to her who is the model of womanhood, the lily of 
God's garden. The school opens with the brief lesson 
in catechism, carefully explained and well illustrated, 
teaching duties to God, to the state, to one's fellow- 
men, respect for authority, obedience to law, charity 
to all, the excellence of virtue, and especially the duty 
of holy purity of life, which is sullied by one de- 
liberate foul thought. The crucifix is on the wall, and 
the pierced hands and the bleeding body tell of the 
frightful expiation of the immorality of man by Him 
who said: "Blessed are the pure in heart for they 
shall see God." The picture of Mary is prominent, 
and her mild, pure eyes beaming on her children 
make them love her beautiful life, and lure them on 
by the odor of her virtues, to run after her in the 
ways in which she walked. To please her and her 
Divine Son the Catholic child labors willingly, and 
tries to overcome himself in moments of weariness or 
distraction from his other studies, so that in this, as 
in other things, is it verified that "piety is useful.'' 
When faults are committed, Christian charity, quick 
to see, presides over the correction, using gentleness 
of manner, even when administering a well-merited 
chastisement ; dwelling more on the offence to God 
than on the displeasure to the teacher or the harm to 
the pupil himself. Then come the rewards, adminis- 



3 o8 



Are Catholics Right? 



tered with discrimination, directing the mind to one's 
spiritual well-being. Then the joyous feasts that come 
in the year tell of the consoling truths of the faith, the 
life of which is the charity which makes one love God, 
and obey Him, by loving one's neighbor, his kindred, 
his fellow-men, the state, in whose patriotic, festive 
days all take part with a loyalty second to none. 

Thus the foundation of a useful life is laid. Is it 
not a good one ? Does it not give hope of a good 
and useful citizen ? Does it not afford ground to 
believe that should any one, as will now and then 
happen, forget himself and fall away, he will remember 
his early training and more easily return ? Only just 
now we come from receiving back a poor girl, whose 
conscience recalled to her the lessons she had learned 
from the Sisters, and the elevating influences she had 
once experienced. Such is the frequent happening in 
the life of every priest engaged in the active ministry. 
He knows and appreciates how salutary is the early 
Christian training. When it is wanting, how blank is 
everything ; dreary, hopeless ! 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



XIX. 



HUMAN CERTITUDE AND DIVINE FAITH. 

{The Catholic World, April, 1892.) 

IT may not be amiss, in this period of widespread 
doubt and uncertainty in matters of religion, to 
direct our thoughts to the question of belief ; to ask 
ourselves, What is belief ? and how far is it to extend 
— what is its domain ? To be able to respond we 
must first be able to give a satisfactory answer to a 
fundamental question, to wit : is there such a thing 
as certainty ? For belief and certainty may be said 
to be correlative terms in religious matters ; the one 
implies the other. To give heed to some of the most 
prominent men of the day, there is no such thing as 
certainty. If so, there can be no such thing as belief. 
Yet Rev. Dr. Patton is reported as having said there 
is no such thing as metaphysical certainty. If this be 
so, we may bid good-by to certainty of any kind, and 
accept the system of universal doubt, and adopt prob- 
ability as the practical principle of action. 

How destructive this system is of all real knowledge, 
it is not difficult to understand. Had the learned 
gentleman referred to confined himself to saying that 
certainty could not be demonstrated, he would not 

3°9 



Human Certitude 



have been wide of the mark ; for demonstration means 
the showing of a truth from prior and better known 
truth. But there can be nothing prior to certainty or 
better known than it is, and therefore it cannot be 
demonstrated. On the other hand, every science de- 
mands a first truth to which nothing is prior, for it is 
the cause of what follows, which is the effect ; science 
being systematized knowledge, it must have a solid 
foundation of primal truth to rest upon. Certainty is 
an intellectual intuition of a truth, and that truth is, 
that I exist and know I am not deceived in my 
ability to apprehend without danger of error some 
facts. It is a postulate of our intellectual nature, of 
reason. It goes before anything else, and therefore 
cannot be demonstrated unless we choose to look upon 
the application of the principle of contradiction as a 
species of demonstration, that the same thing cannot 
be and not be at the same time. But we must be 
certain of this before we apply it ; and this interferes 
with the demonstration. It is, therefore, necessary to 
regard certainty as an intuition and call it the sight 
of the soul, as much needed for it as sight is for the 
body. And just as a man sees a thing, and asks no 
one to prove it to him, so the soul sees the truth 
which is connatural to it at a glance ; and the first 
truth it does see is that it can and does know what 
is. To say this does not belong to metaphysics, 
when it is the very first truth that science demands, 
seems to us, at least, strange ; for it is usual to speak 
of knowledge of being and of its attributes as meta- 
physics, though they are in fact physical realities, 
thought out systematically by the mind. 



and Divine Faith. 



There is besides this the moral persuasion of the 
human race that there is such a thing as certainty, 
and the whole of our social economy rests on that 
basis. It may be said this is a posteriori and in reality 
begs the question. But it is a fact that shows beyond 
doubt the existence of the fact of certainty. The uni- 
versal testimony of the human mind cannot be gainsaid 
without assailing its Author, and bidding adieu to reason. 

If certainty is a necessity in the order of natural 
truth, still more is it necessary in the order of that 
which is above nature, the region or domain of re- 
vealed truth. Catholics understand this ; the introduc- 
tion of private judgment as the ultimate tribunal of 
religious truth has had the effect of blunting the sensi- 
tiveness of those outside the church with regard to this 
necessity ; with the result of causing them to be unable, 
it would seem, to understand it. Recently the Evening 
Post of New York (Aug. 30, 1 891) published the answer 
of three foremost preachers — the Rev. Lyman Abbott, 
the Rev. B. H. Conwell, and the Rev. (or Professor) 
David Swing, of Chicago — to the questions : " Do you 
believe absolutely that the miracles recorded in the 
Bible were actually performed, or do you think the 
people of those times only believed they witnessed 
miracles ? " And, " If we reject any part of the Scrip- 
tures as literal truth, must we not reject all ? " 

To say these were crucial questions for the reverend 
gentlemen, and that they evaded answering directly, is 
only what was to have been expected. Dr. Abbott 
does not even touch the miracles with a tongs, but 
deftly glides off to speak of the foundation of belief 
as afforded by Christ himself. Yet Christ says : "If 



312 



Hu m a n Ce rtitu de 



you do not believe me, believe the works I do. They 
give testimony of me " (St. John, v. 36). 

Rev. Mr. Conwell falls back at once on his lines of 
defense — good sense and the beauty of the Bible. 

Professor Swing lets the miracles go. That nut is 
too hard for him to crack. And then he falls back on 
his line, and says : " There is nothing essential except 
a devotion to the Divine Founder of our religion " — 
a very vague utterance, each one understanding it in 
his own way. He goes still farther in his hazy system, 
and subjoins, " An ethical religion is gradually dis- 
placing the religion of simple belief" — which is simply 
a fact outside the Catholic Church. So we see what it 
has all come to : uncertainty in everything, certainty 
about nothing. This is the ultimate word of Protes- 
tantism. 

This result and the nature of the case itself lead us 
to see clearly that unless we bid adieu to reason there 
must be and is such a thing as certainty, and that we 
can have certainty in the order in which we are. 
Philosophers usually class certainty according to the 
manner in which it is acquired ; they speak of meta- 
physical, physical, and moral certainty. With metaphys- 
ical certainty and physical we need not occupy ourselves 
in this connection. Moral certainty, which is based on 
the laws which govern man's free will, is that which is the 
ground of natural belief. These laws lead us to accept 
truth on the authority of others, historic truth, and the 
events of every. day of which we have not been wit- 
nesses. It is akin to the certainty which leads us to 
accept religious truth. Such truth is pre-eminently re- 
ceived on the authority of another. " Faith," says St. 



and Divine Faith. 



Paul, " cometh by hearing." Religious beliefs, or faith, 
may be denned to be the acceptance of the truths of 
revelation through the divinely appointed teacher, the 
church God has established on earth ; a church he insti- 
tuted through his prophets, and, lastly, through his 
Divine Son, who came on earth to found it. and by 
means of miracles convinced men of his right to teach 
in the name of God, and led them to accept what he 
taught. The church of Christ, then, is the teacher. 
Once we are sure of that our duty is clear ; we are to 
believe all the truths she believes and teaches because 
God has revealed them, and because she teaches by 
the authority of God, and by his assistance : " Go, 
teach all nations ; " "I am with you all days, even to 
the consummation of the world." The motive of faith 
Is, therefore, much superior to that of human belief ; 
this gives certainty, that a certainty more intense, as 
God its source is so far above nature, on the laws of 
which, as we have said, human certainty is based. 

There are certain results and consequences of this sys- 
tem of Christianity which it is well for us to consider. 

If it is God who speaks to us through the church, 
then we must accept what the church authoritatively 
teaches ; otherwise we are " as the heathen and the 
publican." While all Catholics are agreed on this 
point, there comes up the question, What rule is to be 
followed in matters in which there is no official declara- 
tion, or dogmatic decision on the part of the church ; 
where councils have not spoken nor supreme pontiffs 
given ex cathedra decrees ? This is a very important 
matter, especially in its influence on Catholic life, and 
for this reason we wish to dwell on it at some length. 



3H 



H 7i ni an Certitude 



Outside of the dogmatic decrees of councils and of 
the ex cathedra decisions of popes, there is the mass 
of Catholic tradition, which has come down to us from 
the beginning, and of which also God is the author. 
This is the truth which permeates Catholic life and 
makes the members of the church think alike, no 
matter where they may be. This atmosphere of truth 
is the medium in which the church lives. Through it 
she is active ; where, on the contrary, it is clouded, 
where this truth is obscured, there is languor, decay, 
death. Just as a living body has instincts which make 
it act spontaneously with regard to what is necessary 
for it, as air, food, drink, and self-preservation, so there 
is an instinct in the believer to accept all revealed 
truth, and to think, speak, and act, in what vitally af- 
fects his belief, this disposition having been formed in 
him by the environment of faith, its atmosphere, its 
teachings, its language, its common habit of thought, 
akin to the training of the ear, which, without trouble 
and unerringly, detects the discordant note of music. 
Just as one who would show himself indisposed as re- 
gards what is necessary for the maintenance of his 
natural life would give good ground to doubt of his 
healthy condition, so one who would be careless with 
reference to propositions that affect unfavorably the 
faith would justify the conclusion that he was not 
sound in it. Therefore it is that we find in all, as a 
gift from the Holy Spirit, a spiritual instinct which 
leads us to believe ; to regard the church as an ever- 
active teacher aided by the Holy Ghost, and directing 
our minds to accept with the utmost docility what she 
says, without waiting to critically examine the manner 



and Divine Faith. 



315 



in which she speaks, or to look for unanimity. This 
pious disposition to believe has been dwelt on by theo- 
logians and councils, and by them it is spoken of as 
a gift of God. 

The second Council of Orange, held A. D. 529, in its 
fifth chapter, thus speaks : " If any one says that as 
the increase of faith so also the beginning of it, the 
very pious disposition to believe — ipsum crediditatis af- 
fectum — by which we believe in Him who justifies the 
impious, and come to the generation of sacred baptism, 
is in us, not by the gift of grace, that is, by the in- 
spiration of the Holy Spirit correcting our will from 
infidelity to faith, from impiety to piety, but is in us 
naturally, he is proven to be an adversary of the 
apostolic dogmas." In this most important decree of 
this council, received in the church with all the author- 
ity of a dogmatic decree, we call attention to this 
phrase — ■ crediditatis affectus — a pious disposition to 
believe, which is declared to be a gift of grace, an in- 
spiration of the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost, like 
nature, is never wanting in what is necessary; and, 
therefore, this most necessary tendency to believe he 
implants in every one to whom the gift of faith is 
vouchsafed. Where, then, this gift is vigorous, sound, 
healthy, there its first manifestation is to be seen in 
the docility to the teaching power, the pious disposi- 
tion to believe. Where it is not vigorous, nor sound, 
nor healthy, there such a disposition will not show 
itself ; but, on the contrary, a restless, resisting, critical 
spirit will be seen. Therefore, too, where we see such 
indisposition, where we see one on his guard against 
the church's voice, and jealous of his independence, 



316 



Human Certitude 



we are not uncharitable in drawing the conclusion that 
the faith has become weak. 

It may be said that this is going too far ; that as 
there are superstitious people, who accept as of faith 
what is not, there may be those who may not be 
ready to take everything without first ascertaining by 
approved ways what is to be held. The former may 
be called maximizers y the latter, wishing to preserve 
their liberty, accept the least, but in doing so, in the 
trust they put in their own lights, are apt to reject 
what is essential, and are known as minimizers. A 
good while ago Cardinal Newman made the remark : 
t( A people's religion is a corrupt religion" — meaning 
thereby that individuals without instruction are apt to 
be too credulous and take up what there is no author- 
ity to uphold. This certainly may be ; but there will 
be a mark about this excess which will make it easy 
to recognize it as spurious, it will be wanting in uni- 
versality ; and. depending on individual weakness, will 
follow its phases. Studying the whole people, though, 
the theologian will see the work of the Holy Spirit 
pervading them, making them dwell together of one 
mind, unius moris in domo. It would have been well 
with the minimizers of some years back had they made 
that study more profoundly. It is not characteristic of 
the minimizer that he does this. His is a work of 
thought evolved from his own mind, weighing the doc- 
trines by his own standard, an individual one, deter- 
mined largely by the influences that surround him, 
education and habit of thought. We do not mean to 
say that he is not learned ; on the contrary, very often 
he is most learned. It seems to us that the trust in 



and Divine Faith. 



3 l 7 



his own equipment very often breeds this spirit of 
judgment ; while the simplicity of the less learned leads 
them to put their trust in the great body of the faith- 
ful, in whom pre-eminently the Holy Spirit dwells, and 
to look up instinctively to the teaching authority 
which that same Spirit has given the church and 
through which he directs it ; and, lastly, to the tradi- 
tion of the church, of which the fathers are the wit- 
nesses. We may illustrate by a fact which appears to 
present this phase of the mind of one who does not 
minimize Whenever the cardinal-vicar of Rome pub- 
lishes one of his Inviti Sacri, or brief pastorals, the 
Roman theologians are on the lookout to know how 
the people receive it, and what comments they make. 
And this not for the purpose of judging whether it is 
acceptable, but because they appreciate the instinct of 
faith in the people, which would make them detect 
at once any word not in keeping with the faith ; and, 
on the contrary, appreciate expressions which ade- 
quately convey to them the teaching of their belief. 

As we write, there comes to us on the wings of 
electricity the news that a great light has gone out in 
Israel ; that one who has been a bright example in the 
church is no more ; that the great Cardinal Archbishop 
of Westminster, Henry Edward Manning, has been 
called from the scene of his earthly labors. No longer 
will that voice, with its strong yet gentle note, be 
heard ; that tongue, musical in its beauty of language 
and charm of expression, is stilled. A hush comes 
over the audience he held spellbound, as widely- 
spread as are the regions of the earth ; for the sound 
of his words went from pole to pole, and from the 



3'8 



Human Certitude 



rising of the sun to its setting. All who felt the 
genial influence of his teachings of charity, and of his 
example, sing his praise, pay their tribute of respectful 
admiration, and offer for him, in a grateful spirit, their 
prayers to God. But though he is no longer with us 
in the flesh, his teachings abide, teachings that re-echo 
the spirit of his Master, who said : Misereor super 
turbam — " I have pity upon the people " ; teachings 
that breathe the spirit of his Master, who said : " It is 
my food to do the will of my Father " ; teachings and 
examples that fulfill the command of his Master, who 
bade all hear the church : " He who hears you hears 
me " ; " He who will not hear the church let him be 
to thee as the heathen and the publican." Had we 
sought for one whose words and life were an illustra- 
tion of the docility to the authority of the church of 
which we are treating, no one more excelling in this 
regard could we have found than Cardinal Manning. 
Now that he is no more, we can speak freely of him 
and of his career. It was our good fortune and privi- 
lege to have known him for nearly thirty years, and 
to have been an admirer of the man, and a grateful 
recipient of spiritual aid from his life and words. 
During the eventful period of the Vatican Council, the 
days that preceded it, the time of its duration and the 
days that followed it, we were living in the city of 
Rome, and in relation sometimes with him personally, 
and with those of his own nation through whom we 
could always have correct information. His discourses, 
too, and his writings were in our hands as soon as they 
came from the press, read with an appreciation that 
came of a mutual interest in the triumph of the truth. 



and Divine Faith. 



319 



In England before the Vatican Council there had 
existed the controversy regarding the decisions of the 
Roman congregations ; and those who were contending 
against a well-meant but undue valuation of them as 
sharing the infallibility of the Roman pontiff, and who, 
carried away by a spirit of opposition, incidentally in 
other matters fell short of what would be expected of 
a genuine Catholic, were named by Mr. Ward, of the 
Dublin Review, mmimizers. Without going to the 
opposite extreme, Cardinal Manning contended always 
for a docility of spirit towards the teaching authority 
of the church. He advocated the view that our feel- 
ings even should be with the church, and in this he 
was most commendable and deserved well of Catholics 
everywhere. What, in fact, is more unfilial than that 
a son should be continually on his guard against the 
authority of his father, requiring to be fully persuaded 
of the right before he obeys. All will censure such a 
spirit. But it is worse for a Catholic to have such a 
disposition in regard to the sovereign pontiff and the 
church ; for it argues weakness of faith, an ignoring 
of the fact that Christ her founder, and the Holy 
Ghost her spouse, are ever with the church, and 
giving her prudence from above. Remotely it savors 
of the spirit of the world, of an anti-Christian spirit. 
Of this anti-Christian spirit, Cardinal Manning wrote, 
in his lectures on the Four Great Evils of the Day 
(lect. iv. § 5) : 

" There is one person upon whom this anti-Christian spirit 
concentrates itself, as the lightning upon the conductor. There is 
one person upon earth who is the pinnacle of the temple, which is 
always the first to be struck. It is the Vicar of Jesus Christ ; and 



320 



Human Certitude 



that for the most obvious of reasons. There is no man on earth 
so near to Jesus Christ as his own vicar. Two hundred and fifty- 
seven links, and we arrive at the person of the Son of God. Two 
hundred and fifty-seven pontiffs, and we are in the presence of 
the Master whom his vicar represents. That chain runs through 
the ages of Christian history, and connects us with the day, when, 
on the coasts of Decapolis, Jesus said to Peter: 'Thou art Peter, 
and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell 
shall not prevail against it.' . . . To Peter were given the 
two great prerogatives which constitute the plenitude of his 
master's office. To him first and to him alone, before all others, 
though in the presence of the others, was given the power of the 
keys. To him, and to him alone, and in the presence of the 
others, was given also the charge of the universal flock : ' Feed 
my sheep.' To him, and to him alone exclusively, were spoken 
the words : ' Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have 
you, that he might sift you as wheat (that is, all the Apostles) ; 
but I have prayed for thee ' — (in the singular number ; for thee, 
Peter) — 'that thy faith fail not; and thou being once converted, 
confirm thy brethren' (St. Luke xxii., 31, 32) ; and therefore the 
plenitude of jurisdiction, and the plenitude of truth, with the 
promise of the divine assistance to preserve him in that truth, 
was given to Peter, and in Peter to his successors/' 

Further on the cardinal uses these beautiful words : 

"Poor Ireland! What preserved it three hundred years ago 
and during three hundred years of persecution ? Fidelity to the 
Vicar of Jesus Christ, fidelity to Rome, fidelity to the change- 
less See of Peter. The arch of the faith is kept fast by that 
keystone, which the world would fain strike out if it could, but 
never has prevailed to do so, and Ireland has been sustained 
by it ; and to this day among the nations of the Christian world 
there is not to be found a people so instinct with faith, and so 
governed by Christian morality, as the people of Ireland." 

But the following passage from lect. i. of this series 
is more to the purpose for which we write. Page 26 
(edition 1 871) he says : 



and Divine Faith. 



321 



" Before the Vatican Council there was growing up in the 
minds of some men a disposition which, I am happy to say, is 
nearly cast out again, to diminish and to explain away, to 
understate and reduce to a minimum that which Catholics ought 
to believe and practice. This spirit began in Germany. It says : 
' I believe everything which the church has defaied. I believe 
all dogmas : everything which has been defined by a general 
council.' This sounds a large and generous profession of faith; 
but they forget that whatsoever was revealed on the day of 
Pentecost to the Apostles, and by the Apostles preached to the 
nations of the world, and has descended in the full stream of 
universal unbelief and constant tradition, though it has never 
been defined, is still matter of Divine faith. Thus, there are 
truths of faith which have never been defined ; and they have 
never been defined because they have never been contradicted. 
They have not been defined because they have not been denied. 
The definition of the truth is the fortification of the church 
against the assaults of unbelief. Some of the greatest truths of 
revelation are to this day undefined. The infallibility of the 
church has never been defined. The infallibility of the head 
of the church was only defined the other clay. But the infalli- 
bility of the church,, for which every Catholic would lay down 
his life, has never been defined until now ; the infallibility of 
the church is at this moment where the infallibility of the pope 
was this time last year: an undefined point of Christian revela- 
tion, believed by the Christian world, but not yet put in the 
form of a definition. When, therefore, men said they would, 
only believe dogmas and definitions by general councils, they 
implied, without knowing it, that they would not believe in the 
infallibility of the church. But the whole tradition of Chris- 
tianity comes down to us on the universal testimony and the 
infallibility of the Church of God, which, whether defined or 
not, is a matter of Divine faith." 

In all the actions of this illustrious prince of the 
church, not even excepting his remarkable influence 
over the London strikes at the docks, which surprised 
the English and led them captive — of all his actions 



522 Human Certitude and Divine Faith. 



nothing impresses us so strongly as the docility of 
spirit he manifested in believing and in conforming to 
the teaching and thought of the church. It was like 
unto the spirit of a saint who in early childhood 
drank in the faith at his mother's breast. It argues a 
great gift of faith that is the especial and generous 
work of the Holy Ghost in his soul, and for this rea- 
son it demands our admiration and calls for our 
imitation. When God vouchsafes to bestow a gift 
above nature on a man. this requires of him most 
respectful gratitude and faithful co-operation. This gift 
of faith we have received, and it calls upon us to 
foster it and make it bear the fruit of good works. It 
is the talent which is given that we may labor till the 
Giver comes. It is certain that he will demand an ac- 
count of the use we shall have made of it. What a 
misfortune if any one shall have " wrapped it up in a 
napkin " and put it aside ! And this those do who, 
ashamed of their birthright, are on their guard against 
accepting too much and remain in a state of inac- 
tivity. Of such one hardly errs in saying, with St. 
James : " Faith without works is dead." Xot so did 
the saints, for their prayer has ever been what the 
Apostles offered up to their Divine Master : " Lord, 
increase our faith." 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



xx. 



TOTAL ABSTINENCE. 
(first article.) 

(American Ecclesiastical Review, August, 1892.) 

IF there is any one question more likely than another 
to affect deeply and widely the people of this 
country, it is, we venture to say, what is commonly 
known as the "Temperance Question." It is not 
necessary to go largely into the matter to prove this. 
The enthusiasm which ever attends on the temperance 
meeting — the crowded halls, the eloquence of the 
speakers, the sympathy all feel with sincere workers 
for it; the existence, too, of the Prohibition Party; the 
laws introduced to prohibit the traffic in spirits, or to 
moderate it, through high license — all go to show how 
deeply seated is the feeling in its favor. It is not a 
thing of yesterday ; it has been agitated among Eng- 
lish-speaking people for wellnigh a century. The fame 
of Father Mathew endures. His friends style him the 
Apostle of Temperance, and in truth, whatever may be 
said of his system or method, he deserves the grati- 
tude of immense multitudes rescued by him from ex- 
cess in drinking and its direful consequences. 

There are those who advocate total abstinence as 
a reaction in their own case ; there are others who 

323 



324 



Total Abstinence. 



do so through a noble motive of aiding their brethren ; 
both are to be commended ; but no one will deny that 
a far greater meed of praise is due to him who, hav- 
ing no need to do so, by word and example enforces 
the observance of it. There is something in this both 
noble and heroic. But precisely because there is in it 
the noble and the heroic, it is likely that those who 
will do so will not be very numerous, in proportion to 
the community. For a perpetuated movement of this 
kind there must be some powerful evil to avert, a 
great good to be obtained, and hence total abstinence 
is more likely to be sustained and advocated as a reme- 
dial measure, preventive of a vast amount of evil, moral 
and social. As it therefore more properly has the 
nature or character of a protest against the abuse of 
spirituous drinks, it is to be expected that those who 
have suffered from such abuse will most loudly and 
feelingly advocate it. But when excitement and feel- 
ing come into play, there is likely to be excess, show- 
ing itself in arguments pushed too far, or lacking in 
soundness, and in measures which reason cannot always 
approve. Thus, for example, the moderate use of alco- 
holic beverages is cried down, and even condemned 
as sinful ; those dealing in them are spoken of as guilty 
of sin, and measures are introduced which take away 
individual rights, to prevent a comparatively small num- 
ber, (for drunkards are the exception in any communi- 
ty,) from doing harm by excess in drinking — and that 
with little success, for those addicted to excess always 
manage to find a "hole in the wall." It seems to us, 
the best way to help the cause is to preserve it from 
its erring friends ; for what is based on truth is sure 



Tola I A 6 j tine nee. 



325 



to commend itself to the thoughtful, and the preven- 
tion of mistakes guarantees success. It is for this rea- 
son that, having been requested to write these articles, 
Ave propose to give the correct view on this subject of 
total abstinence, and on what relates to it ; and this 
all the more, because there are not lacking the best of 
reasons for keeping it up. 

We have said that total abstinence is a remedial 
measure; its purpose is to remedy an abuse. An 
abuse means or implies a use which is not in itself 
bad, in other words good, in which there is no moral 
evil. A long time ago St. Augustine laid down the 
principle: "Evil is the result of enjoyment of those 
things which should only be used ; velle utendis frui." 
St. Thomas of Aquin too, lays down the rule : agere 
ctaii delectatione non est peccatum ; agere propter delec- 
tationem peccatum est. " To do what it is lawful to 
-do, with pleasure, is no sin ; but to do the same thing 
for the pleasure of it only is a sin." These rules 
may be said more properly to apply to the gratifica- 
tion of sense, as for example eating and drinking. The 
evil, therefore, which total abstinence wars against, 
intemperance, consists in abuse ; it is the enjoyment of 
drinking for the sake of the pleasure, and the excess 
of that enjoyment. The use of the same beverage be- 
cause needed, useful, wholesome, medicinal, is not sin- 
ful. Hence the reasonable and moderate use of wine 
or alcoholic drinks is prohibited by no law, and if 
enjoyed, while used for a proper purpose, as refresh- 
ment, is in no wise sinful. It might be said that the 
supposition of the use of alcoholic drink being ever 
wholesome, useful, or necessary, is untenable. But 



326 



Total Abstinence. 



this is not so. The testimony, experience, and prac- 
tice of the human race is against any such absolute 
assertion. What is to be said then of the charts 
scientific men have prepared, which are in use in 
schools, demonstrating the effects of alcohol on the 
liver and on the stomach ? 

The answer is simple. These effects are the result 
of excess; a moderate rational use of wine and spirits 
produces no such effects. 

But we have known such effects in the case of 
persons who never were intoxicated; what then? That 
may be ; but a person has not to become intoxicated 
before drinking to excess. He is guilty of excess 
when he drinks more than he needs, or more frequently 
than necessary. The secret tippler may be in a 
continual state of sin, though externally he may give 
no indication of his habit ; and in all probability will 
have a hob- nailed liver, or a chronic inflamed condi- 
tion of the coats of his stomach, before the man who 
drinks openly, and now and then only gets drunk. 

St. Thomas of Aquin treats this matter of drinking 
very clearly, as is his wont. Question 149, 2a, 2ae, he 
says sobriety is a special virtue which keeps away the 
special impediment to reason which comes from the 
fumes of strong drink, and he goes on to ask whether 
the use of wine is in itself wholly unlawful ; and he 
answers no: just as no food or drink except accident- 
ally ; as for example, if wine do not agree with one, 
or he exceed his measure, or act against a vow, or 
give scandal. As will be seen, this enumeration of 
exceptional cases which render the use of wine unlaw- 
ful, only goes to strengthen his proposition, that the 



Total Abstinence. 



327 



use of wine, in itself, is not unlawful : Bibere vinum, 
secundum se loquendo, non est illicitnm. With these 
principles clearly understood, there is no impediment 
to the establishment of societies which more or less 
control or exclude the use of wine or liquors, such as 
for instance, the Society of the Sacred Thirst, which 
had its origin in Armagh, and requires its members 
to say certain prayers in honor of the thirst of our 
Lord on the cross, and especially to abstain from 
the use of wine and spirituous drinks on Friday ; 
other societies which permit wine and beer, but 
rigidly exclude alcoholic drinks ; and, finally, the Total 
Abstinence Society, which has the approbation of the 
Holy See, and has done so great and widespread 
good. These societies are all governed by sound 
Catholic principle and do not admit of the fanaticism 
which condemns as criminal any who do not follow 
their practices. It is this which recommends to the 
approval of the country the action of Catholics in 
this important matter, and which caused one of the 
most prominent statesmen of our day to remark to 
the writer : " I like the position of the Catholic Church 
with regard to temperance ; it is temperance without 
fanaticism." 

What has been a source of detriment to the move- 
ment favoring total abstinence, has been this fanati- 
cism in the past, now in great part done away with. 
The excitement with which it was deemed necessary 
to introduce and keep up the movement, as it was 
important to arrest attention and make men think, had 
the effect as always happens, of putting under a ban 
those who would not take the pledge. This pledge 



3 28 



Total Abstinence. 



was given by Father Mathew, with such an accompani- 
ment of religious rite, as to impress with its solem- 
nity, and lead those taking it to regard those who 
did not as wanting in their duty, and to con- 
sider the breaking of the pledge as the violation 
of a vow. This thing was kept up for many years 
after the death of Father Mathew, and perhaps even 
now obtains. The writer has frequently met w T ith 
those who had this false idea, and who really from a 
false conscience did commit a mortal sin by " breaking 
the pledge." Such a sin could be committed only on 
the supposition that the pledge was a vow, a solemn 
promise made to God to do a good thing. As we 
understand it, those who introduced and perpetuated 
the practice of taking the pledge never intended it 
should be looked on as a vow ; they w 7 ould have done 
wrong had they so intended it, and made those tak- 
ing it so understand. In itself the privation is a 
serious one and so onerous that it has not unfre- 
quently been broken, besides being a source of infin- 
ite scruple. Now 7 no one has a right to increase the 
chances of sin ; that is folly. It is wisdom to diminish 
such chances. At most the pledge could be considered 
merely a solemn resolution to abstain, as a matter of 
good to oneself and to one's neighbor. The use of 
wine and spirituous liquors not being in itself wrong, 
no human enactment, such as the pledge, could make 
it so ; for a sin is something in thought, or in word, 
or in deed, against the law of God. The law of man 
derives its authority from the law 7 of God, upon which 
we must fall back when we wish to show a thing sin- 
ful. To break the pledge, therefore, is to break one's 



Total Abstinence. 



329 



resolution, to act dishonorably, as one is believed to 
keep it, and on that account enjoys honor and certain 
privileges. On the other hand this pledge, rightly 
understood, is very useful, and helps greatly a life of 
sobriety. It seems to us that besides the impression 
made upon the pledge-taker, it protects him from 
temptation, and especially from conviviality, from the 
frequenting of places and company dangerous to himself, 
from invitations to drink ; while on the other hand, 
it brings him in contact with those disposed as he is, 
whose sober, and regular, and industrious life is a safe- 
guard to him, and an encouragement. This of itself is 
enough to authorize the perpetuation of the right use 
of the pledge, in spreading the practice of total 
abstinence. 

An objection might be made to what has just been 
said regarding the breaking of the pledge. Is not 
the assertion that the breaking of the pledge is not 
sinful too sweeping ? Is it not sometimes sinful ? We 
answer : it is ; but that is as the phrase goes, per acci- 
dens, and not from the nature of the pledge. It may 
happen that a man who takes the pledge is so weak 
that he cannot resist temptation ; his appetite for drink 
is so strong, that if he takes one glass, he will take 
another and another, and so drink to excess. In this 
case most certainly the man sins, not precisely by 
breaking the pledge, but in doing so he puts himself 
in the proximate occasion of becoming intoxicated ; 
and for this reason his first glass is, or is likely to 
be, a mortal sin ; we say likely to be, because some 
especial reason might make it only venially sinful, or 
in some rare case not sinful at all. 



330 



Total Abstinence. 



A further objection might be urged on the ground 
of a contract with a temperance society entered into 
by the one taking the pledge. The society agrees 
to give him aid and the enjoyment of certain priv- 
ileges it can bestow, and that on condition of the 
pledge as a sine qua non. Is not the breaking of the 
pledge a violation of the contract, and does it not 
constitute a sin against justice ? It seems to us that 
several things must be considered. Does this man 
pay his dues ? Does he also perform other duties 
imposed upon him by the society ? If he does, he 
makes the return upon which the obligation to render 
him aid rests, and he does not sin against justice in 
breaking the pledge. If this man is entitled to aid and 
enjoys privileges simply on account of having taken 
the pledge, and for no other reason, should he break 
the pledge and continue to enjoy his privileges and 
have pecuniary aid in sickness, he sins against com- 
mutative justice ; not however if, after having broken 
the pledge, he honorably withdraws from the society. 
The best thing he can do, however, is to go to his 
chief director, acknowledge his fault, and renew his 
pledge : for there is none so ready to be indulgent to 
human weakness and to condone a moment of forget- 
fulness as the guides whose experience in directing souls 
is apt to make them considerate; and that all the more, 
the greater such experience is. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



XXI. 



TOTAL ABSTINENCE. 

(SECOND ARTICLE.) 

{American Ecclesiastical Review, September, 1892.) 

IN the preceding article we have endeavored to lay 
down the principle on which the cause of total 
abstinence should rest, and be guided. We propose in 
the present paper to give some of the reasons which 
favor it, natural, moral and social, as well as to guard 
it against some dangers which lie in its way, 

Leaving to others to treat this subject in a declam- 
atory and pathetic manner, we study it as a means 
beneficial to many and useful to all. 

From the standpoint of a view of the natural effects 
of the use of intoxicants, the rule is, the less of them 
the better. They have their use ; so have opium, strych- 
nine and aconite. The danger in the use of these lat- 
ter is well known ; yet duly used they are very use- 
ful. Alcoholic drinks, as we have said, have their use, 
and such moderate use cannot be condemned as sin- 
ful. Their nature regulates their use. But there is un- 
doubtedly a very great danger in the unguarded and 
immoderate use of them, from the pleasure which ac- 
companies such use, and which most frequently is the 
reason of the use of them. Of late it has become fash- 



33* 



332 



Total Abstinence. 



ionable to describe the result of frequent drinking as a 
species of insanity, " dipsomania " being the term usually 
adopted to designate this condition. To such an ex- 
tent has this gone that we see it openly advocated by 
those who extol the Keeley cure, that this craving for 
alcoholic stimulants is simply a disease like any other, 
often inherited, and the tendency is to look on it as 
having been, we may say, innocently contracted; with 
the result of removing from drunkenness the shame 
which naturally should attach to it. People have been 
surprised to find clubs formed by those cured through 
the Keeley process, as if they had done nothing deserv- 
ing of condemnation in bringing about the need of 
such a cure. 

Looking at the matter physiologically, it is impos- 
sible to admit such a theory. Undoubtedly there are 
those who have a greater appetite for stimulants than 
others, or a greater need. But the appetite for food 
and drink can be cultivated, excited, or controlled. The 
French have a saying: c'est le premier pas qui coute ; 
it is the first step that is the dangerous one, 
which costs. And it is the neglect to use pru- 
dence and moderation in the beginning that pro- 
duces the so-called dipsomaniac. Constantly stimu- 
lating the nerves of taste, he brings about such a 
state of chronic excitement, that the slightest 
occasion will cause a paroxysm of craving ; even the 
thought, when one is striving to correct himself will, 
by the mysterious action of the mind on the body, 
produce it. For some, who find themselves tending 
early in this direction, total abstinence is the only 
safeguard, and therefore necessary for them. This neces- 



Total Abstinence. 



333 



sity becomes all the more apparent from the evil results 
of excessive drinking on the organs of the body, 
especially the liver and stomach. What the Eng- 
lish call the "hob-nailed liver" is a terrible and in- 
curable condition brought about by excess of alcoholic 
stimulants. It consists in a chronic inflammation of 
the membrane of the liver which dips into the organ 
everywhere and holds its small lobes together. The 
inflamed condition caused by alcohol causes it to con- 
tract, to squeeze the lobes, to interfere with their ac- 
tion, and the result is that what should pass through 
the liver, naturally, is impeded, and dropsy incurable 
is the result, the early stage of which is the bloated 
condition of the features, the later pronounced dropsy, 
especially of the heart, resulting in death. This of 
itself, it seems to us, should be enough to put one on 
his guard in the use of intoxicants ; while it should be 
the reason for not a few to enter a total abstinence 
society. Certainly there is nothing more deplorable 
than to witness such effects in a man whose future, 
but for his folly, would have been so different. How 
many, in the very midst of a brilliant career, have 
gone down to a drunkard's grave in this way ! 

Leaving this fertile field of natural causes that call 
for moderation, we come to the still more important 
one of morality. Here we are on a higher plane. 
St. Leo the Great says : this is the man's natural 
(moral) dignity, if he copy in himself as in a mirror 
the image of the divine goodness. Among the things 
that mar this reflection, that tarnish this mirror, is ex- 
cess in the use of stimulants. It cloulds the mind, 
brutifies the appetites, and so excluding from the mind 



334 



Total Abstineitce. 



the truth and beauty which is in God, and for which 
it was made, drinking debases, and stimulates the 
lower passions, and makes of a man a mere animal, 
even sinking him below the level of the brute. Not 
only, therefore, is his natural dignity sacrificed, but he 
becomes a slave. He seems to have lost his birthright, 
liberty, so powerful is the influence to which he is 
subject. He will see his degradation, may loathe his 
boon companions, he may detest his surroundings, but 
in the midst of these he remains, till, becoming cal- 
lous to everything, every sense of delicacy blunted, he 
is an object despised by himself and despised by his 
associates. In this condition what moral sense is 
left ? He is simply in a condition to be a prey to 
the first temptation, and the perpetrator of every 
enormity. The laws are lenient to a man when guilty 
of a misdeed in a state of intoxication, and in some 
cases it is well it should be so. But too often men 
know their evil tendencies, and notwithstanding this 
indulge to excess, and they commit those dastardly 
crimes which shock the community, too often perpe- 
trated to the destruction of those nature herself bids 
man care for. If to this we couple the threats of 
Scripture, and the words of the Apostle telling us 
that drunkards shall not inherit the kingdom of heaven, 
the moral misery of this man is complete ; there is 
no hope for him in time or in eternity. Yet total 
abstinence has raised such up once more, and made 
them conscious of their moral dignity and saved them 
for this world and for the next. 

While such personal reasons conciliate the good will 
of the individual towards the cause of total abstinence, 



Total Abstinence. 



335 



there are most powerful arguments that should in- 
duce society at large to foster it, within the bounds of 
discretion and justice. Every man is a member of 
society, and has his part to fulfill. When each one 
does that part the others benefit by it, and the whole 
is perfected thereby. The neglect of duties, resulting 
from drinking, is one of the most serious drawbacks 
to society. It fills the prisons, workhouses, and asy- 
lums. It taxes the masses for their support. It is 
the cause of the greater cost imposed upon a com- 
munity for the protection of its members. Besides this, 
there is the influence of example; the associations 
which breed evil and crime are met with as excessive 
drinking increases ; families are left destitute ; the chil- 
dren grow up in neglect and in evil, to be the criminals 
of the future, and pauperism, with its degradation, goes 
on increasing. In self-defense, therefore, society must 
extend its protection to the cause of total abstinence, 
and it is well it does. Every indulgence and en- 
couragement should be given it. Society will be 
amply repaid for whatever it may do in favor of the 
movement. Even if it determine to adopt measures to 
help on total abstinence and, on the other hand, to 
repress without unreasonably restricting individual 
liberty,— which is so vitally opposed to it — it need have 
no fear ; for besides the support of the thoughtful and 
prudent, it will derive benefit from such steps in better 
civil order and the improved moral condition of the 
people. It is not our purpose to suggest means by 
which the state can and should further the efforts to 
suppress intemperance; but we cannot refrain from re- 
ferring to two measures which in our judgment should 



Total Abstinence. 



be put in practice universally. The first of these is 
high license, which will have the effect of diminishing 
the number of saloons, and in all probability of limiting 
the dispensing of spirituous stimulants to a more re- 
sponsible class of people, whose interest it is to pre- 
vent excess in drinking. To prohibit would be neither 
wise nor just to the community ; not wise, because it 
would be nugatory, and meet with the fate such 
measures have met with everywhere. Evasion and 
hypocrisy, and secret drinking on a large scale, have 
been the result of such compulsory measures. It 
would be unjust to the community, because the mod- 
erate use of stimulants, as we have shown, is not 
wrong, but, on the contrary, useful, wholesome, and at 
times necessary. To attempt to prohibit a few at the 
expense of the many is not wise legislation ; as we 
have said, those who indulge to excess in drinking are 
comparatively few ; and besides they will get what 
the}- want. All that can be done is to limit the traffic 
to prevent, as far as possible, abuse. 

The second measure is the prevention of minors from 
frequenting saloons, and the abolishing of the '''wine- 
room " feature in the saloon. In many places the law 
which prevents minors frequenting saloons is in force ; 
whether it is well enforced is not so easy to say. 
The wine room is an abomination ; there is no greater 
occasion of evil to our young women than this. No 
saloon should be licensed which would have one of 
these appendages, whether the saloon be great or 
small. It is an unfortunate thing that any woman 
should frequent a saloon ; but if she does, whatever is 
taken should be taken in public, and the protection of 



Total Abstinence. 



publicity should be assured her. This is what gener- 
ally is done in the restaurants and gardens of Europe, 
and though we are well aware that the evilly disposed 
find ways of following their inclinations, it is un- 
doubtedly the fact that publicity prevents a great deal 
of evil, and tends to make people stop short of excess. 
There is another powerful reason that prompts favoring 
the movement against intemperance and the fostering 
of the observance of total abstinence. The unit of 
society is the family ; and the condition of this initial 
element of society vitally affects it. The enemy of 
domestic happiness, of domestic virtue, of the welfare 
of the child, perhaps most to be feared, is intemper- 
ance. This matter need only be referred to ; all of us 
have seen the house of the drunkard, and the house of 
the sober man ; here all order, cleanliness, propriety, 
and happiness ; there disorder, squalor, indecency and 
misery. No other argument against intemperance and 
in favor of total abstinence carries greater weight with 
it than the condition of the family, and we who are 
in the midst of the people and see the brutal ways of 
men towards their wives, the consequent separations, 
the neglect of the children, their absolute abandonment 
by their parents brutified by excess, would invoke any 
influence that could put a stop to such a state of 
things, and therefore it is that we are all glad to en- 
courage those who try to gain over to the wholesome 
laws of sobriety or total abstinence any of the slaves 
of excess. But enactments and stringent measures are 
of little use unless the will be under the influence of 
religion, and of this influence we shall treat in our 
following article. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



XXII. 



TOTAL ABSTINENCE. 



(third article.) 



{American Ecclesiastical Review, October, 1892.) 

OT only has the total abstinence movement phys- 



1 1 ical, moral, and social reasons to commend it ; it 
has also positive approbation on the part of the Holy 
See, and, what emphasizes this the more, indulgences 
granted to those who, under the guidance of religion, 
enroll themselves in the society. This is a very import- 
ant point, and we propose to speak of it at some 
length. The date of the brief to which we refer is 
May 10, 1879. 

It is as follows : 



Beloved Sons, Health and Apostolic Benediction : 

The devotedness so tenderly manifested in your letter we have 
received with that feeling of fatherly affection that best corresponds 
to your expression of filial love. The nature of your union, and the 
zeal with which you strive to provide for the lasting utility and well- 
being of your fellow-citizens, by earnest prayer, by good works and 
the practice of Christian piety, have made this devotedness of yours 




LEO, P. P. XIII. 



338 



Total Abstinence. 



339 



the more grateful to us. Especially pleasing to us is that noble 
determination of yours to oppose and uproot the baneful vice of 
drunkenness, and to keep far from yourselves and those united with 
you all incentive to it ; for, in the words of the wise man, " It goeth 
in pleasantly, but in the end it will bite like a snake, and will spread 
abroad poison like a basilisk. " 

Wherefore, with all our heart, we desire that your example and 
zeal may benefit others, in order to the destroying, or, at least, 
lessening of the evils which we understand you so properly lament 
and dread. 

For this same reason have we listened favorably to the prayer 
you offered, expressing the desire of gaining those spiritual blessings 
which, to other pious associations of a like nature in England and 
Ireland, this Apostolic See has granted. Therefore it is that we 
transmit to you the accompanying letter, in the form of a brief, 
from which you will learn the manner in which we have yielded "to 
your desire. 

In conclusion, we beg God to guide your counsels, and keep 
among you harmony and unity of soul, for the purpose of fostering 
and strengthening which you have banded together. As an earnest 
of Heaven's favor, and an evidence of our fatherly well-wishing upon 
you and our other beloved sons united with you in this pious cove- 
nant, we bestow, most lovingly, our Apostolic Benediction. 

Given at Rome, at St. Peter's, this ioth day of May, 1879, in the 
second year of our Pontificate. 

Leo, P. P. XIII. 



To Our Beloved Sons of the Committee on Address and others of 

the Convention of the Catholic Total Abstinence Union of 

America, assembled in the City of Indianapolis, in the State of 
hidia?ia, United States of America : 



Rev. James E. Mulholland, 
" George L. Willard, 
" Lewis Deynott, 
" J. D. Bowles, 
" James McGolrick, 

" H. R. O'DONNELL, 

Daniel B. Donovan, 
Henry Cassidy, 



\ Committee on Address* 



340 



Total Abstinence. 



The concession of indulgence bears date June 10, 
1879 ; we subjoin a copy of it. 

leo, p. p. xiii. 

For a Perpetual Memory of the Thing. 

Since, as we have lately learned, in the city of Indianapolis, 
in the United States of North America, a Catholic Total Absti- 
nence Society or Pious Union, has been lawfully convened, we, 
in order that the Union which has proposed to itself an end 
so commendable and so salutary, may, with God's blessing, day 
by day be farther extended and more widely propagated, trusting 
in the mercy of the omnipotent God, and relying upon the 
authority of the Holy Apostles, Peter and Paul, grant, on the 
first day of their entrance, a Plenary Indulgence and remission 
of all their sins to all and each of the faithful who in future 
shall be enrolled as members in the above said Society or 
Pious Union, if truly penitent and having confessed, they shall 
have received the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist. 

At the moment of death, we grant, also a Plenary Indul- 
gence, as well of the present each and all members as of those 
that may in future become members of the said Society or 
Union, if, in like manner, they be truly penitent, having con- 
fessed their sins, and receive Holy Communion ; or, when this 
cannot be done, if they shall, with sentiments of contrition, call 
devoutly at least upon the name of Jesus with the lips, or if 
this cannot be done, in the heart. 

In like manner, we mercifully grant in the Lord, a Plenary 
Indulgence to the same present members : and to all hereafter 
to be numbered in the said Society or Union, if truly penitent 
and having received the Sacraments of Penance and the Eu- 
charist, they shall each year, on the principal feast day of the 
same Union, to be chosen once for all by the above named 
members, and approved of by the Bishop, visit with devotion 
their respective parish churches any time from the first Vespers 
to sunset of their feast day, and shall there piously pray for 
the harmony of Christian Princes, for the uprooting of heresies 



Total Abstinence. 



341 



and conversion of sinners, and the exaltation of Holy Mother 
Church. 

Moreover, in favor of the present and future members of the 
said Union, who, at least, with contrite hearts, shall, on four 
days of the year, festival or otherwise, to be designated once 
for all by the Ordinary, visit each his own parish church, and 
there pray as above stated, we grant, in the accustomed form 
of the Church, an indulgence of seven years, and as many 
quarantines from the penance enjoined upon them or otherwise 
in whatsoever manner by them due, each day that they shall have 
fulfilled these conditions. 

All and each of these indulgences, absolutions from sins, re- 
mission of penances, we allow to be applied, by way of suffrage, 
to the souls of the faithful who have departed this life in the 
friendship of God, all things whatsoever to the contrary not- 
withstanding. We wish these presents to remain in force hence- 
forth forever. 

Given at Rome, at St. Peter's, under the ring of the Fisher- 
man, June X, MDCCCLXXIX, in the second year of our 
Pontificate. 

For Card. Carafa De Traetto, 

D. Jacobini, Substitute. 

In the letter of the Holy Father, we call attention to 
the fact that he expresses his gratification at the re- 
ception of the address of the Total Abstinence Society, 
due especially to the circumstance that earnest prayer, 
good works and the practice of Christian piety are to 
be the solid foundation upon which the cause is to 
rest, which aims at opposing and uprooting the bane- 
ful vice of drunkenness, and keeping far removed all 
incentive to it from those whose sentiments in particu- 
lar the address expresses. He adds that he cordially 
desires that their example and zeal may benefit others, 
so as to destroy or lessen the evils which they justly 
lament and dread. All this is very significant and 



342 



Total Abstinence. 



weighty. It removes the total abstinence movement 
from the category of experiments, or Temperance 
Utopian schemes, of which there are so many, and 
places the Society among the approved societies of the 
Catholic Church ; a result first brought about chiefly, 
if we mistake not, in England, by the zealous charity 
of his Eminence the late Cardinal Manning, and of the 
present Archbishop of Westminster, Most Rev. Dr. 
Vaughan. 

The Indulgences granted, as we see, are abundant 
and prove the interest the Holy Father takes in the 
Total Abstinence Society. They are first, a Plenary 
Indulgence on the day of joining the Society ; second, 
a Plenary Indulgence at the hour of death ; third, a 
Plenary Indulgence once a year on the feast day of 
the Society ; fourth, a Partial Indulgence on four days 
in the year. No fuller recognition and approbation 
on the part of the Head of the church could be 
given, and for this reason, if for no other, it would be 
unlawful to speak in disparaging terms of the Total 
Abstinence Society, whereas, those who are docile to the 
voice of their chief Pastor will unite in praising the 
noble end this society has in view, and in furthering 
it as far as it may be in their power. 

It is not enough, however, to rest in the mere fact 
of such high and sacred approval. Movements of a 
practical character like this, require constant activity 
to keep them up. The members fail in their duty 
unless they appreciate this and unremittingly labor 
for the purpose aforesaid. 

They must first be honorable and faithful observers 
of this obligation. They receive honor and considera- 



Total Abstinence, 



343 



tion, and enjoy privileges as having promised to keep 
the pledge and totally abstain ; they must even avoid 
the appearance of evil in this respect, and not frequent 
that company or those places where any suspicion 
might attach to them. They must avoid dangerous 
occasions, and not esteem themselves too strong to 
yield ; for it is written : he who loveth the danger shall 
perish therein. 

Secondly. This will be more effectually brought 
about if the members encourage total abstinence by 
social amusement as a feature of their union. If 
they can be brought together to partake of rational and 
improving entertainments, in which all exaggeration is 
avoided, and literary and artistic taste cultivated, they 
will, as they have done in the past, experience the 
benefit resulting from mutual example and encourage- 
ment. They will keep each other up ; they will improve 
themselves ; they will protect themselves against similar 
allurements elsewhere, the end of which is not laudable. 

Thirdly. They should keep themselves thoroughly 
occupied. This is a far more important point than that 
of amusement. Idleness teaches much evil ; no amount 
of resolution will hold out against this. On the other 
hand the active employment of one's mind and mem- 
bers, in those who are wise enough to so devote them- 
selves, is good for soul and body, developing a love 
for it that is almost enough to live for, itself alone. 
With it comes self-respect, respect of others, contrib- 
uting to the happiness of those we love, the habit of 
economy, gradual accumulation of a competency, and 
an honored old age. 

To these, fourthly, is to be added the faithful fre- 



344 



Total Abstinence. 



quenting of the Sacraments. Here is the most import- 
ant feature of all, without which, too, no one will be 
likely to persevere. This has been well understood 
by all zealous clergymen who have furthered the total 
abstinence movement. The mantle of religion was 
thrown around it, and members were advised "to go 
to their duties." But in too many cases it was not 
urged upon them to go frequently, and in this, we are 
persuaded, is to be found the principal cause of a large 
number of failures to keep inviolate the pledge of total 
abstinence. Frequent Communion is not for religious 
only; it is for the laity as well. " He that eateth Me, 
the same shall live by Me," was said of all ; the strength 
which comes from this practice can be known to those 
only who have faithfully tried it. In our days men and 
women of the world go often to the Sacraments, and 
find this does not interfere with their usefulness, their 
cheerfulness, nor with their proper recreation ; on the 
contrary, it gives them the peace, the happiness, the 
fortitude which is not of earth, and which means 
perseverance. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



XXIII. 



THE BRUTE-SOUL. 

{The Catholic World, July, 1893.) 

ANY one who will attentively study matter and its 
properties will often see many wonderful things. 
Some of these will astonish him, and perhaps over- 
throw all his preconceived notions. They will set him 
to theorizing, make him think that after all matter 
is not inert ; that inertness is an idea and nothing 
more. He will perhaps throw over the atomic con- 
ception of matter, and regard material substance as a 
collection of simple essences with power to act — a force. 
Yet whatever theory one may adopt as most fitting 
in his view to explain phenomena which, after all, 
cannot be adequately explained, there are certain things 
he cannot ignore, which are fixed facts, and laws that 
induction has made known to us from the study of 
the facts. These facts and laws are : first, that matter 
does not move unless a force moves it ; " if matter 
moves," says Professor Tyndall, " it is force that moves 
it"; second, that chemical action produces movement 
in particles and new combinations ; third, that in these 
changes heat, and electricity and light sometimes also, 
are evolved; fourth, that endosmosis and exosmosis, ab- 

345 



346 



The Brute- Soul. 



sorption and exhalation, are constantly going on and 
in a regular manner, with fixed law ; fifth, that the 
same can be said of expansion and contraction ; sixth, 
that all these movements " may be reduced to a push 
or a pull in a straight line " (Tyndall, Familiar Science) ; 
and, should there be an apparent contradiction from 
objects moving in a curve, this is, as we all know, from 
a contrast of forces, the resultant being the diagonal. 
Whatever, therefore, be our theory of matter, it can- 
not be said to enter practically into our consideration 
of it, for we have to do with its constant and unvary- 
ing manifestations, to which all experience bears wit- 
ness ; such, for example, as inability to move of itself — 
inertness, impenetrability, gravitation, etc. 

In the lower order of matter, in what is inorganic, 
we notice most markedly the existence of these facts 
and laws; even in crystallization, so beautiful and so 
wonderful, we can to some extent explain what occurs 
to bring about these delicate formations. 

WHAT IS THIS SOMETHING? 

But when we come to organic matter, then we begin 
to find what passes our comprehension ; we recognize 
the existence and the application of the laws of mat- 
ter, under which we can class the greater part of the 
phenomena. But there is something more than that. 
There is peculiar development of matter which is not 
chemical action ; there is something back of matter 
which gives rise to new combination and development; 
there is something which moves matter, and is a prin- 
ciple of movement. It exists in the vegetable, in the 



The Brute- Soul. 



347 



animal, in man ; it is self-moving. What is this some- 
thing ? It is not matter, for it shows a tendency to 
act of itself with a purpose, avoiding what is hurtful 
and seeking what is beneficial — to act, as we may say, 
intelligently. This is seen even in plants ; it is observed 
yet more markedly in the lower forms of life ; it is 
evident in the higher forms of the brute creation. We 
therefore exclude from the idea of it all notion of matter ; 
we conceive of it as free from all composition, as 
being a simple essence, which, not being matter, is 
bound down to matter and has its sphere limited to 
matter, taking it up, appropriating and developing it, 
according to the tendency given by its Author. 

Does this imply that such simple essence is in any 
sense material ? The question is not an idle one. One 
comes across every now and then the proposition : 
"The brute-soul is material." St. Thomas Aquinas 
and others who follow him have this phrase, or the 
equivalent of it. We must see, however, what 
they mean by it ; for unless we understand the mode 
of speech of these writers and theologians, we shall 
undoubtedly be led astray. Fortunately St. Thomas is 
very clear in telling us what he means. San Severino, 
who explains this wording of St. Thomas, quotes him 
as saying : " Everything whose being is in matter 
must be material." Hence, as the soul of the brute 
has its being in matter, he styles it material ; moreover, 
as its actions show what it is, and those actions are 
material, it is material too. Again, as it owes its being 
to matter as condition, and ceases to exist when the 
matter of the body is destroyed, it follows that it is 
material. Yet in speaking in this way St. Thomas does 



348 



The Brute- Soul. 



not intend to teach that the soul of the brute is com- 
posed of matter. On the contrary, he says it is not. 
San Severino shows this very pointedly (p. 374, vol. 
ii.), and that it is indivisible, or simple ; and he quotes 
St. Thomas as saying that the soul of the brute can, 
in some manner, be called a spirit, as that word sig- 
nifies an invisible substance with power to move. He 
holds, however, to the idea of material in the sense, 
first, of the soul of the brute being educed from the 
potentiality or possibility of matter; second, of its ac- 
tion being bound down to matter and inseparable from 
it; third, of its ceasing to be when the body it animated 
is destroyed. 

HOW DOES IT COME OUT OF MATTER ? 

According, therefore, to St. Thomas, the brute-soul 
is simple and cannot be perceived by the senses, but 
comes out of matter, and ceases to be when the matter 
is destroyed. How does it come out of matter ? What 
is to be understood by the phrase " it is educed from 
the potentiality of matter ? " This is an interesting 
question, and suggests others. Let us see whither our 
thoughts will lead us. To understand the above phrase, 
or proposition, it is well to recall the definition of crea- 
tion given by the scholastics : it is an act by which 
something comes into being from nothing of itself, 
something is made out of nothing, nor did the subject, 
in which it is, previously exist — ex nihilo stci et subjecti. 
This, of course, requires direct actual exercise of Divine 
Power, and is called properly creation. But where the 
subject, in which the soul is to be, previously exists, 



The Brute-Soul. 



349 



i.e., matter, determining the action of the soul which 
comes into being only for it, the act, by which this 
brute-soul is, has not the name of creation. We con- 
fess that this way of looking at the manner in which 
the soul of the brute, of everything that moves itself, 
comes into being does not claim our unconditional ac- 
ceptance.* The brute-soul is acknowledged to have 
simplicity, and, in a certain sense, the nature of a 
spirit. It would appear that the only part matter 
could have in the existence of the vivifying principle, 
the soul, is that it is in a fit condition to receive it 
and be developed into a composite substance, body 
and soul. The reason is that matter cannot give what 
it has not — simplicity, self-movement, life ; it is inert. 
Therefore, if anything exists having simplicity, move- 
ment, life, or power to produce a living organism, it 
must come from the act of the Creator, willing its 
existence. That act was one in the beginning, enti- 
tatively, as the metaphysicians say ; but its multifold 
effects are in time, and are conditioned on the state of 
matter ; terminatively the act is multifold — but still the 
direct act of the Creator. 

This view is more or less held, as those familiar with 
this matter know, by a number of able metaphysicians. 
In the manner in which we have here put it, it seems 
to us to lead the way to reconciling the conflicting 
thoughts of those who do not believe in evolution and 
those Christian writers who do believe in it. Al- 
though we are not of those who agree with the latter, 
but hold, with Agassiz and Virchow, that not only is 

* Why should this be predicated of the brute-soul and not of the 
human soul ? Is not the mode of production the same? 



35o 



The Brute- Soul. 



Darwin's theory not proven, not only that the missing 
link is wanting, but that the theory itself of man's 
evolution from other lower animal life is unsound ; in 
our judgment it is possible to conceive a mode of 
coming into existence which to some extent justifies a 
Christian in holding to the theory of evolution in a 
modified senbe ; the manner in which it is understood 
by Darwin and the materialistic and pantheistic schools 
of to-day being excluded. We therefore here endeav- 
or to explain evolution in a Christian sense ; as 
coming, that is, by the will of an omnipotent Creator 
— God. St. Augustine, in treating of the six days of 
creation, advances his theory of the potentiality of 
matter. In the beginning God created heaven and 
earth; that is— as the Council of the Vatican has it — 
the spiritual and the material. That act, as the 
African doctor explains it, gave to matter a power to 
develop the germs of everything that is material. All 
this was contained in this initial act. In process of 
time the different orders of beings were to come into 
existence. This theory we can admit. But the theory 
does not explain how this potentiality of matter be- 
comes actual. Is it by an inherent efficacy of matter, 
or is it by the placing in relation with matter a prin- 
ciple which causes matter to take on peculiar develop- 
ment ? We feel persuaded that, had St. Augustine 
lived at this day, he would have answered : matter 
cannot produce or cause spirit to exist ; for it cannot 
give what it has not. But, he would go on to say, 
matter by general laws having by successive stages 
reached certain conditions adapted to animal life — the 
anima, the spirit, or the soul, by the antecedent act 



The Brute- Soul. 



351 



of the Creator calling spirit into being from the begin- 
ning, sprang into existence from nothing to act in 
matter, to take it up, to develop it, to be its form, 
the substantial form by which it is what it is — an 
insect, a reptile, a fish, a bird, or a man — each re- 
quiring its own substantial form, distinct and differing 
from the rest. 

THE FORM IS NOT OF MATTER. 

This form is not of matter. There is a possibility of 
its existence in matter ; and if it is to be only sen- 
tient and not spiritual or intellectual, it will be in a 
certain sense material, inasmuch as its operations are 
limited to matter. We go further : we think St. Thomas 
would, did he live in these days, change his word- 
ing so as to remove the danger of his words being 
taken in a material sense, and say that the soul 
of the brute is educed from matter as a subject by 
divine power. That he meant it is clear to us, as 
we have shown above. In this sense, then, can the 
assertion that the theory of evolution is true be toler- 
ated, namely : God having brought matter to such per- 
fection as to render animal life possible, directly calls 
into being the soul which can take up and develop this 
perfected matter, so that the existence of such form 
or soul seems to depend on and follow from the con- 
dition of matter, while in reality antecedently it was 
directly willed by God and called into being by him 
from nothing, ex nihilo sni. 

It will be seen at a glance that this theory, or ex- 
planation, denies the passage of one species into an- 



35 2 The Brute -Soul. 

other. Such a thing has never been proved. If it 
appear otherwise, this comes from a want of knowledge 
of the possibilities of the form. The form which ani- 
mates the larva of the gnat has a possibility of developing 
matter in the various stages of its existence; in like 
manner the form of the butterfly has its threefold pos- 
sibility of development. But such forms remain material 
in the sense of being bound down to matter. Being 
material they do not and cannot pass to the intellectual 
order of being ; and therefore, as Professor Dana has 
said, when it comes to man it is necessary for God to 
call into being a special existence, man's form, his 
spiritual soul, which, if we understand eduction from 
matter to be the possibility of matter being made to 
form the human body, might be said to be educed 
from the potentiality of matter, in the sense explained 
above. This, however, by no means excludes the abso- 
lute act of the Creator, without which the soul even of 
the brute could not exist, for the very simple reason 
that matter has no such qualities as simplicity and self- 
movement to impart. While, therefore, we would not 
quarrel with the Christian who explains evolution in 
this way, we feel it is much the safer, as the hypoth- 
esis of evolution has not been proven, to say that no 
species ever passes into another, even in such a way, 
but that every species is a separate creation of God, 
willed in the beginning and in time called into being 
by the direct act of God giving existence to the form 
which did not exist before, but which God now makes 
take hold of the matter He has prepared for it. 
When evolutionists succeed in proving that one species 
passes into another, then it will be time to take up 



The Brute- Soul. 



353 



the question, and show that a higher form has been 
added to the simian body to make it the body of a 
human being. Such a passing of species they have not 
proven, nor, in our humble opinion, will they ever be 
able to prove it. 



OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. 



XXIV. 



BRAHMANISM DOES NOT ANTEDATE THE 
MOSAIC WRITINGS. 



{The Catholic World, February, 1894.) 



HE period in which we are is generally considered 



1 to be one of transition, and those who go by the 
name of " advanced thinkers " are pronounced in their 
views and are in a hurry to throw aside the past. 
While it is true the world is always changing, it seems 
to us that, in studying these changes, we do well to 
remember that human nature does not change, and 
that the temptations to evil and to error do not change ; 
and that therefore it is wise to look to the experience 
of the past and to the canons of sound reasoning to 
guard against both evil and error. We wish to invoke 
these in the remarks we subjoin ; for we are desirous of 
putting before the public what may tend to stay the 
downward course of many minds that are throwing 
aside Christianity and deceiving themselves with the 
idea that they have found a source of enlightenment 
in the ancient religious teaching of the Hindus. While 
we are striving to do this, we feel sure that what we 
shall say, or rather present from weighty sources, will 
confirm the believer in Christianity in his faith and 




354 



Brahman ism and Mosaic Writings. 355 



in his conviction that he has nothing to fear from the 
most learned opposition. 

A HINDUPHILE AUTHORITY. 

The principal source whence we present the reasons 
which will serve our purpose is a work written not 
long ago by a zealous and learned missionary bishop, 
Monseigneur Laouenan, Vicar-Apostolic of Pondichery, 
India, printed at the Press of the Catholic Mission in 
Pondichery, in 1884. The author of this most interest- 
ing book, which met with such approval that it was 
honored by a public act of the Academy of France, 
or, as it is technically said, " couronne" was born in 
Brittany. He studied for the priesthood in the house 
of the "Missions Etrangeres " in Paris, and went as a 
missionary priest to India. During his studies he 
had been impressed with the force of the arguments 
against Christianity derived from the traditions and 
sacred books of the Hindus, although not to the extent 
of causing him to waver in that faith which rests upon 
the Resurrection of Christ. He had read Cardinal 
Wiseman's lectures on the relation between Science 
and Revealed Religion. He had admired the manner 
in which the great cardinal laid bare the pretensions 
to excessive antiquity put forward by those who were 
carried away by their enthusiasm for everything Hindu ; 
citing the labors of astronomers, for example, to show 
that the state of the heavens described in the epic 
poem, "The Ramayana," as accompanying the birth of 
Rama, could only have taken place nine hundred and 
sixty-one years before Christ, and not in fabled antiq- 



356 Brahmanism does not Antedate 



uity; or that the birth of Krishna or Kristna, the 
pretended prototype of Christ, at which the position of 
the planets is given in his Janampatra, could only 
have occurred August 7, A D. 600. (Lect. VII.) 

The young priest resolved to consecrate himself to 
the work of still further examination into the claims of 
Hindu theology, or rather mythology, and to study it 
on the spot. This resolution was carried out, and the 
result is the book we have before us, with the title 
Brahmanism and its Relations. In writing it he spent 
thirty-five years, availing himself of the researches of 
the most successful writers of all nationalities on the 
Sacred Books of India. Such a work is valuable from 
the information it gives, and is rendered more so by 
the temperate manner in which the author of it speaks. 
For he lets us understand that he does not pretend to 
have cleared up all the obscure points of Indian 
chronology. 

VAGUENESS OF INDIAN LITERATURE. 
In his introduction he says : 

"We do not flatter ourselves with the idea that we 
have entirely succeeded. The special characteristic of 
all Indian literature is that it has almost absolutely no 
chronology ; so all who have written on ancient India 
up to the Mohammedan invasion in the eleventh century 
are reduced to conjectures more or less risky. Our con- 
dition is the same. Certain facts, however, seem to us 
indubitable ; among others, the successive transforma- 
tions in the Brahmanical doctrine and worship, the last 
of which is only a few centuries back : whence it fol- 



the Mosaic Writings. 



357 



lows that Brahmanism in its present form is relatively 
modern, subsequent not only to Judaism, but also to 
Christianity. Now, it is especially in the books which 
have been inspired by the present, actual form of Brah- 
manism, or have been created by it, that are to be 
found the traditions and doctrines relating to Chris- 
tianity. In like manner it is principally in the laws of 
Manu that are contained the traditions and the institu- 
tions which resemble the recitals and the prescriptions 
of the Pentateuch, and it is to-day established that 
the Mdnava-Dharma-Sastra is much after the time of 
Moses." (p. ix.) 

Before going further into the matter of this book, 
it will be useful to hear what others have to say re- 
garding the time in which the sacred writings of the 
Hindus were written, and with reference to the books 
themselves. 

Professor Julius Eggeling, Ph.D. and Professor of 
Sanskrit and Comparative Philology in the University 
of Edinburgh, in his article on Brahmanism in the 
Encyclopedia Britannica, may be said to give an 
opinion representing the conclusion of scholars on the 
subject. This is w r hat he says : 

" The Hindu scriptures consist of four separate col- 
lections, or Sanhitas, of sacred texts or Mantras, in- 
cluding hymns, incantations, and sacrificial forms of 
prayer; viz., the Rich or Rig-vcda, the Saman or 
Sama-veda, the Yajush or Yajur-veda, and the Athar- 
van or Atharva-veda. Each of these four text-books 
has attached to it a body of prose writings, called 
Brahmanas, which presuppose the Sanhitas, purporting 
as they do to explain chiefly the ceremonial application 



358 Brahmanism does not Antedate 



of the texts, and the origin and import of the sacri- 
ficial rites for which these were supposed to have been 
composed. Besides the Brahmanas proper, these 
theological works, and in a few isolated cases some of 
the Sanhitas, include two kinds of appendages, the 
Aranyakas and Upanishads, both of which and especially 
the latter, by their language and contents, generally 
betray a more modern origin than the works to which 
they are annexed." 

The Aranyakas, like the Brahmanas, explain the 
text and " give somewhat more prominence to the 
mystical sense of the rites of worship." The Upan- 
isliads 44 are taken up to a great extent with speculations 
on the problems of the universe, and the religious aims 
of man." " The hymns of the Rig-vcda constitute the 
earliest lyrical effusions of the Aryan settlers in India 
which have been handed down to posterity. They are 
certainly not all equally old : on the contrary, they 
evidently represent the literary activity of many 
generations of bards, though their relative age cannot 
as yet be determined with anything like certainty. 
The tenth and last book of the collection, however, 
at any rate has all the characteristics of a later ap- 
pendage, and in language and spirit many of its 
hymns approach very nearly to the level of the con- 
tents of the Atharvan." 44 Several important works, 
the original composition of which has probably to be 
assigned to the early days of Brahmanism, such as the 
Institutes of Manu, and the two great epics, the 
Mahabharata and the Ramayana, in the form in which 
they have been handed down to us, show manifest 
traces of a more modern redaction." 



the Mosaic Writings. 



359 



We have here first the SanJiitas or sacred books, next 
the Brahmanas, then appendages, the Aranyakas and 
the Upatiishads. The most ancient of all is the Rig- 
veda, which was the work of many generations of 
bards ; the relative age of its hymns cannot be deter- 
mined with anything like certainty. The Institutes of 
Manu, and the epics, the Mahabharata and the Rama- 
yana, as handed down to us, manifest traces of a more 
modern redaction, or editorial compilation. It will be 
well to bear these statements in mind as we proceed. 

MAX MULLER'S OPINION. 

Professor Max M tiller, in his Lectures on the Origin 
and Growth of Religion, p. 145 (ed. 1879, Scribner), 
says : " I ascribe the collection and the systematic ar- 
rangement of the Vedic hymns and formulas, which we 
find in four books or the SamJiitas of the Rig-veda, 
the Yagur-veda, the Sama-veda, and the Atharva-veda y 
to the Mantra Period, from the year 800 B c. to the 
year icoo." "The Bralimanas belong to a period from 
600 to 800 B. c." "The Sutras, treatises on phonetics, 
etymology, exegesis, metre, customs, laws, geometry, 
astronomy, and philosophy, are of a period subsequent 
to these, B. C. 500." " It is therefore before 1000 
B. c. that we must place the spontaneous growth of 
Vedic poetry, such as we find in the Rig-veda, and in 
the Rig-veda only. . . . How far back that period, 
the so-called Khandas period, extended, who can tell ? 
Some scholars extend it to two or three thousand 
years before our era, but it is far better to show the 
different layers of thought that produced the Vedic 



360 Brahntanism does not Antedate 



religion, and thus to gain an idea of its long growth, 
than to attempt to measure it by years or centuries, 
which can never be more than guesswork " (italics ours). 
" One thing is certain : there is nothing more ancient 
and primitive, not only in India, but in the whole 
Aryan world, than the hymns of the Rig-veda." He 
tells us that these hymns were handed down by mem- 
ory entirely, as likewise all the sacred books, the 
Brahmanas and the Sutras, for " few Sanskrit MSS. in 
India are older than the year 1000 after Christ; nor is 
there an}' evidence that the art of writing was known in 
India much before the beginning of Buddhism, or the 
very end of the Vedic literature." 

A DEFINITE LANDMARK. 

The mention of Buddhism brings us to an interest- 
ing period. Here we are no longer in the dark as to 
time. History comes to our aid. We are able to 
fix dates, at least approximately, and surely. At the 
time of Alexander the Great, Professor MuTler tells 
us, " the whole drama of the ancient literature of 
the Brahmans had been acted. The old language 
had changed, the old religion, after passing through 
many phases (italics ours), had been superseded by 
a new faith." Alexander in his invasion of India, an. 
325 before Christ, after the defeat of Bessus, received 
into his service an Indian chief by name Sisycottus, 
according to Thirl wall (ed. of 1845, Harper & Brothers, 
p. 232). This chief, whom he made commander of 
the important post of Aornus, on the right bank of 
the Indus, not far above the junction of the Cophen, 



the Mosaic Writings. 



361 



seems to be the same as the Sandrocottus or Kand- 
ragrupta mentioned by Professor Max Miiller and 
by Monseigneur Laouenan, who afterwards became 
the founder of a dynasty at Magadha. The grand- 
son of this potentate, Asoka, held the great council 
of the Buddhists in the seventeenth year of his reign, 
or in the year 245 or 242 B. C. (p. 130), and " 162 
years were supposed to have passed between Buddha's 
death and Kandragrupta's accession in the year 315; 
therefore 315+ 162=477 B. C. is the date of Buddha's 
death." Again, "218 years were supposed to have 
passed between Buddha's death and Asoka's inaugu- 
ration in the year 259; 259 + 218=477 is the year of 
Buddha's death." " Further confirmation of this hy- 
pothesis has been lately added by two inscriptions dis- 
covered by General Cunningham, and published by 
Dr. Buhler in the Indian Antiquary." All fabled as- 
sertions of antiquity on the part of Buddhists we see 
by these citations are out of the question, for we are 
now in certain historic periods. 



THE QUESTION OF INSPIRED WRITING. 

Before leaving Professor Miiller's book it is interest- 
ing to note what he says about the inspiration of the 
Rig- veda and other books. Page 132 he writes : "At 
what time the claim of being divinely revealed, and 
therefore infallible, was first set up by the Brahmans 
in favor of the Veda, is difficult to determine. This 
claim, like other claims of the same kind, seems to 
have grown up gradually, till at last it was formulated 
into a theory of inspirations as artificial as any known 



362 BraJimanism does not Antedate 



to us from other religions. As it is not our purpose 
to detain the reader with more lengthy extracts from 
the learned and distinguished professor's work, we 
refer him to the proofs given of this. We simply sum 
up here what has been quoted : The compilation of 
the Rig-veda from spontaneously developed hymns 
and from traditions he deems is not to be assigned 
to an earlier date than the year 1000 B. C. When 
they were first uttered he cannot tell ; to measure the 
growth of the Vedic religion by years "can never be more 
than guesswork." All these hymns and compositions, 
and all the books, down to about the year 500 were 
handed down purely by memory ; writing being, as 
far as evidence goes, unknown in India before that 
time. Again, Sanskrit MSS. as a rule are not to be 
found before 1000 years after Christ. Moreover, the 
Vedic religion passed through many phases by the year 
500 B. C. As for inspiration, it was an afterthought. 



BRAHMANISM COMPARATIVELY MODERN. 

Let us now go back to Monseigneur Laouenan's 
book, and see how he treats of the subject we are 
considering. In search of the information he needed, 
he tells us, he lived in close relations with Indians of 
every class; that he was able to visit the whole of 
India from Cape Comorin and Ceylon to the Himalayas ; 
from the Malabar coast and Bombay to Chittagong in 
Bengal and Rangoon in Birmania. He studied atten- 
tively every thing he saw, read everything treating of 
the people and their religions. As a result he says : 

" What I gathered by observation on the subject of 



the Mosaic Writings. 



363 



Brahman ism made me see that this form of religion 
has not been as immovable as is pretended and be- 
lieved ; that it has undergone transformation, modifica- 
tions many and profound, of which some are modern ; 
in fact, that the Hindu cult, as it exists to-day, is, with 
its books and sacred monuments, of an origin relatively 
recent. I found that these transformations are all after 
the time of Moses, and that the last occurred parallel 
with the preaching of Christianity in India." (Preface, 
p. vii.) 

" My observations led me to another result less ex- 
pected : the non-Aryan races of India have exerted 
a considerable influence on the changes of the Brah- 
manic doctrines and worship. Thus we see the Brah- 
mans borrow their human sacrifices from the Dasyus, 
and unclean practices from the Saktas ; from the Cha- 
mitic tribes the worship of demons and of the Phallus ; 
from the Scythic races the worship of the serpent ; from 
the aborigines the modern characters of Siva and of 
Vishnu ; from Iranian philosophers, or more probably 
from the Jews scattered about in Asia, the notion 
of the one God, the Creator, the knowledge of the 
history of the creation and of the deluge and so many 
primordial traditions ; from the Christians finally what 
is most pure and most elevated in their doctrines and 
institutions." {ibid) 

ABSENCE OF CHRONOLOGY IN INDIA. 

" I owe the reader," he goes on to say, " another 
very important explanation. He will not find dates in 
my book, or he will find but few, which fix in a pre- 



364 Brahmanism does not Antedate 



cise way the epochs to which belong personages, 
events, and periods mentioned. India has no history, 
or rather it possesses no chronology ; historical facts 
abound, but they have no dates ; so that it is by con- 
fronting them with events in the history of other peo- 
ples who had relations with it, that it is possible to 
determine in an approximative manner the time when 
the persons existed or the events took place." And 
he gives the following instance. I may state that a 
Brahman in a discourse published in the Madras Mail 
of May 23, 1884, quoted by our author, says: "The 
Hindu religion was established in India, several thou- 
sand years ago, in the place of the old Buddhist wor- 
ship, the followers of which, after their defeat, had 
emigrated into the neighboring countries of Thibet and 
China." Mark how Monseigneur Laouenan meets this 
boast of antiquity based on the antiquity of Buddhism. 

" In the historical portion of the Vishnu-Purana, 
which is, by the acknowledgment of all Indian scholars, 
the most trustworthy of the Indian works, there is a 
list of the kings of Magadha of which here is the 
abridgment: First appears the dynasty of Vrihadratha, 
composed of eighteen princes who reigned one thou- 
sand years ; which would give to each one a mean 
reign of fifty-five years, a thing not very probable. 
To the dynasty of Vrihadratha succeeded that of 
Pradyota, which counts five kings and held sway one 
hundred and thirty- eight years; then came that of the 
Sesha-nagas, who ruled three hundred and sixty- two; 
then that of the Nandas, who retained the crown only 
one hundred years. After these came the Mauryas, to 
the number of ten, who reigned one hundred and 



the Mosaic Writings. 



365 



thirty-seven years ; the Sungas, who reigned one hun- 
dred and twelve years ; after the Sungas the dynasty 
of the Kanwas, who governed forty-five years ; finally 
that of the Andhras, numbering thirty-three princes, 
and held the supreme power four hundred and fifty- 
six years. That is all the historian gives, except the 
names of the kings. How are we to fix the dates of 
these dynasties ? The history of Alexander the Great 
and of his expedition into India furnishes us the 
means. 

ALEXANDER'S CONQUESTS IN INDIA. 

" The historians of Alexander make mention of an 
Indian adventurer, a guide, by name Sandrocyptus or 
Sandracottus, who had relations with the prince. After 
he left India Sandracottus became king of Magadha 
and of nearly all northern India ; Seleucus Nicator, 
one of the generals and successors of Alexander, made 
a treaty with him and sent to him, as ambassador, 
Megasthenes, who resided several years at Palibothra 
(Patoliputra or Patha), his capital. The expedition of 
Alexander into India took place 327-325 B. C. ; the 
treaty between Seleucus and Sandracottus was con- 
cluded about 312 B. c. ; Megasthenes resided at Pali- 
bothra from the year 306 to the year 298 B. C. 

" It remains now to find this Sandracottus men- 
tioned here, who was sovereign of Magadha. He has 
been identified with certainty as Chandragrupta, head 
of the dynasty of Mauryas, who furnished ten kings to 
Magadha. It follows that Chandragrupta reigned be- 
tween the year 320 and the year 290 B. C. This 
chronological point once established has served to fix 



366 Brahmanism does not Antedate 



several others, and among others the date of Buddha's 
death. This reformer was a contemporary of Vidmisara 
or Bimbisara, and of Ajata-satru, who were converted 
to his teachings and who belonged to the Sesha-nagas 
dynasty mentioned above. Between this dynasty and 
Chandragrupta was the dynasty of the Nandas, who 
were in power one hundred years. The Sesha-nagas 
had reigned three hundred and sixty-two years, which 
gives a mean of thirty-six years to each member of 
the dynasty. Between Bimbisara and the first of the 
Nandas there were five kings, whose combined reigns 
would give us, 36 years x 5=180 years. If now we 
add the 100 years of the Nandas to the 180 of the 
five kings of the Sesha-nagasj we have 280; to this add 
320 A. C, the approximative year of Chandiagrupta's 
accession, we get the year 600 B. c. as the date of 
Buddha's death. But as Buddha died in the eighth 
year of Ajata-satru we must deduct eight from this 
figure, which gives us the year 592 B. C. as the 
year approximatively of Buddha's death. We shall 
see farther on that others, taking different calcula- 
tions, fix the death of Buddha some in 543, others 
in 477, and even in 472 B. C." (p. xi.) 



THE AGE OF THE RIG- VEDA. 

This is a very instructive piece of calculation, for it 
shows us how difficult, even with so certain a date to 
start from as that of Alexander's expedition into India, 
how conjectural everything in Indian chronology must 
necessarily be. As Professor Max Miiller has said, 
there is much guesswork. The calculation, however, is 



the Mosaic Writings. 



3^7 



quite enough to leave the Madras Brahman in an em- 
barrassing position. Not only this, it has an element 
of certainty about it, and if the Vishnu-Purana is really 
reliable, as it is looked on to be by the Brahmans, we 
are on a sure road to determine much that regards 
the Rig-veda and its antiquity with historic correctness. 
Our author shows this as follows : " The hymns of the 
Rig-veda often cite the name of a king of Benares or 
Casi, by name Divodasa, whose sons Pratardana and 
Parutshepa are the authors of several of these hymns. 
On the other hand the Brahmanic legends agree unan- 
imously in saying that this Divodasa was converted by 
Buddha. He was then a contemporary of Buddha, and 
lived in the sixth, or even in the fifth, century before 
our era. It follows from this logically that the hymns 
of the Rig-veda which speak of him and those which 
were composed by his sons are subsequent to that 
time, and cannot be assigned to the fourteenth century, 
as is generally done. 

" Likewise, Prasenajit, king of Sravasti, was instructed 
by Buddha and embraced Buddhism. Now this Pra- 
senajit was the father of Renuka, who was the mother 
of the famous Parasu-Rama. This personage was there- 
fore a contemporary of Buddha. Prasenajit was the 
brother of Druvasandhi, king of Ayodhya, the six- 
teenth descendant and successor of Ikohwaku, founder 
of that city. From Druvasandhi descended the divine 
hero Rama- Chandra. According to a list of the kings 
of Ayodhya, Rama- Chandra was the twenty-third suc- 
cessor of Druvasandhi ; according to another list, he 
was the twelfth ; however that is, he was much pos- 
terior to Buddha and to the sixth century before 



^68 Brahmanism does not Antedate 



Christ ; consequently the Ramayana, which sings his 
exploits, cannot have been composed at an epoch as 
far back as pretended." 

Reading this categoric statement of facts as they are 
given in the Rig-veda and other books of India, one 
cannot help thinking that those who put faith in the 
assertion that these sources of religious information are 
the earliest the human race has, are not only running 
a great risk, not only taking a leap in the dark, but 
really go against the first dictates of common sense. 

THE ARYAN AVATAR. 

After a minute and careful weighing and examina- 
tion of the opinion of the most reliable Indian scholars, 
often widely differing, Monseigneur Laouenan gives his 
conclusions, with regard to the descent of the Aryans 
into India, and then with reference to the earliest 
epoch to which the Rig-veda is to be assigned. 

" We think that without fear the fifteenth or the 
sixteenth century before Christ can be adopted as the 
epoch at which the royal families of the Aryan race 
permanently established themselves in the north of 
India ; and the eighteenth or the nineteenth century as 
that in which this people descended from the high pla- 
teaux of Asia into the fertile plains watered by the Indus 
and its affluents. We are thus nearly in agreement 
with William Jones Colebrooke, P. A. Dubois, and 
Heeren, whose authority is so weighty in this mat- 
ter. Three chief considerations confirm us in this 
opinion. 



the Mosaic Writings. 



369 



" (a) We have seen elsewhere (part ii., c. iii., Of the 
Aryans) that according to the data of the Rig-veda 
itself, the Aryan nation was for a long time without 
kings, probably all the time they dwelt in the Sapta 
Scindhu (at the affluents of the Indus). Would it be 
excessive to put that period as three hundred years ? 

" (b) The commencement of the so-called solar and 
lunar races (when the kingdoms were founded) dates 
from the establishment of the Aryans on the banks 
of the Yamuna and of the Ganges. We have seen 
(Ancient Geography of India) that the most ancient of 
the cities where the kings reigned do not appear to 
reach beyond the fourteenth century before Christ. 

u (c) We have said (part ii., c. ii., The Turanian 
Races) that as a result of the obstinate struggles on 
the high plateaux of Asia between the Iranians and 
the Turanians, the one and the other, according to 
the vicissitudes of the strife, sought peace in India. 
These wars reach as high as the fifteenth and even the 
eighteenth century before the Christian era. We can 
therefore fix on one of these dates as that of the 
immigration of the Aryans into India." 

Having given these conclusions Monseigneur Laoue- 
nan goes on to show, by citations from Indian scholars, 
that the greater part of the hymns of the Rig-veda 
were composed on the plains of the Sapta Scindhu. 
His final conclusion with reference to the time to 
which the Rig-veda is to be assigned are as follows : 

" 1st. The doctrines taught by the Vedas on the 
existence of God and on his nature, on the creation 
of the world, on the soul of man, its immortality and 
existence in a future life, doctrines on the other hand, 



370 Brahmanism does not Antedate 



without form or certainty, offer absolutely nothing that 
is beyond the not- well-defined circle of the traditions 
found among all peoples and even among savages ; 
whence it follows that, even if they were anterior to 
the books of Moses, they could not have furnished him 
with the data so precise, so sublime, which shine out 
at every line of the Pentateuch. 

" 2d. If the Vedas, certainly ancient in part, reach 
a high antiquity, we have no historic proof of their real 
age ; the calculations, or rather the most favorable con- 
jectures, do not place them in a period beyond the 
seventeenth or eighteenth century before Christ — that 
is, the time when Moses lived and wrote. 

" 3d. Several hymns of the Rig, Sama, Yadjur, and 
Atharva-veda are after that date and even after the 
sixth century before Christ ; and it is generally agreed 
on that the hymns of the Rig-veda which treat of the 
Supreme Being or Spirit, of creation, of man's soul, of 
the future life, belong to this latter period, are subse- 
quent to the sixth century before Christ. 

" 4th. It is recognized that the Vedas, and especially 
the hymns of the Rig, have undergone several succes- 
sive compilations or arrangements, the dates of which 
are unknown ; and it is extremely probable, not to say 
certain, that the Vyasa (or compiler) who was the 
last to arrange them, lived in the eleventh century of 
the Christian era. 

" 5th. If therefore we meet with some analogies with 
the doctrines of Judaism and of Christianity and there 
has been borrowing, we have the right to assert that 
it is the Vedas that have borrowed from the Bible, 
and not the Bible from the Vedas." 



the Mosaic Writings. 



37i 



THE LAWS OF MANU. 

This sketch of the learned labors of this zealous 
prelate, little as it does justice to his great work, 
would be entirely wanting in completeness did we 
omit reference to what he says about the Laws of 
Manu, and of the social, commercial, and diplomatic 
relations Asia has had with Europe. 

The Laws of Manu is only another name for the 
Manava-Dharma-Saslra, which book is a treatise on 
justice, virtue, and the duties of man. Manu means 
not so much a person as the intelligent thinking prin- 
ciple. This collection of books is made up by a com- 
piler who has drawn pretty much from every source 
of Hindu learning, even from Buddhism, and is there- 
fore of a period subsequent to the latter. Monseigneur 
Laouenan tells us (p. 341, vol. i.) : " It is to-day 
generally admitted that the compilation of the Manava- 
Dharma-Sastra could not have been begun before the 
fifth century before Christ, and that it was finished 
towards the seventh century of our era — that is, after 
Christ, and perhaps later." After giving the various 
opinions regarding the origin of this collection of laws, 
our author sums up : " None of these opinions, even 
the most favorable to its antiquity, assigns the com- 
position of it to a period as far back as the time of 
Moses. It is therefore impossible that the Legislator 
of the Hebrews copied anything from it." It is a 
very curious thing to examine the text of the citations 
from the Lazvs of Manu, and see how they are like 
to the words of the Pentateuch. In the work we are 
reviewing the texts from both are side by side, and 



372 Brahmanism does not Antedate 



the resemblance is more than striking ; the copying of 
the Bible is evident. Thus, for example, the Bible tells 
us of the ten patriarchs, from Adam to Noe, including 
them : Manu " Desiring to give birth to the human 
race, I produced ten eminent lords of creatures." 
" There were giants in those days " we find thus in 
Maim: " Giants, vampires, titans, dragons." The first 
men, according to Genesis, lived several hundred years ; 
Manu says : " Men exempt from disease obtained the ac- 
complishment of all their desires, and lived four hundred 
years in the first age." Again, God, the Bible tells 
us, shortened the period of man's life, and Manu tells 
us, " in subsequent ages man's span of life was short- 
ened." When the observances of the ceremonial law 
and of the prescriptions of legal purity are examined, 
one sees what has all the appearance of identically the 
same expression. Thus ch. xxv., v. 5 : 



" Deuteronomy. 

" When brethren dwell 
together, and one of them 
dieth without children, the 
wife of the deceased shall 
not marry to another ; but 
his brother shall take her 
and raise up seed for his 
brother. 6. And the first 
son he shall have of her 
he shall call by his name, 
that his name may not be 
abolished in Israel." 



" Manu 

" When the husband of a 
young woman happens to 
die after they had been 
affianced, the brother of 
the deceased shall take her 
to wife." 



the Mosaic Writings. 



373 



Our author gives many such citations, the effect of 
which is a demonstration that the compilers of some 
of the sacred books of India made copious use of the 
Bible. 

ANTIQUITY OF INDO-EUROPEAN COMMERCE. 

The account our author gives of the commercial re- 
lations of Asia with Europe is based on historic facts. 
The city of Tadmor or Palmyra was built by Solomon, 
in the desert, to protect the caravans which came from 
India by way of the Euphrates to Palestine. He 
quotes Strabo telling of the exports from Ceylon to 
the Indian continent of ivory, tortoise-shells, and mer- 
chandise, which reached Europe by way of Cabul, 
Ariana, Hyrcania, the Caspian Sea, the Cyrus and the 
Black Sea. Strabo also speaks of the Arsi of the 
Caspian coasts, who transported on camels the prod- 
ucts of India and of Babylon. The usual way from 
India was by Candahar, where the caravans from India 
and from Persia were wont to meet. He mentions, too, 
the fact of the commerce between Alexandria in 
Egypt and India by way of the Nile to Coptos, thence 
by camels to Myoshormos on the Red Sea, and by 
vessels to India, and states that he saw one hundred 
vessels going from Myoshormos to India. He says 
that this commerce had existed for a long time, and 
was perfectly organized; it had benefited greatly Alex- 
andria, and under the Romans had increased a hun- 
dred-fold. Monseigneur Laouenan also quotes Pliny 
(book i., vi., 26), showing the commerce between Egypt 
and India, and says that India every year got from 
the Romans about $21,000,000. 



374 Brahmanism does not Antedate 

We shall not trespass on the reader with the ac- 
count given by Monseigneur Laouenan of the embas- 
sies to Augustus and Claudius, and of the presence of 
Indians in Europe. We judge it best to close these 
remarks by a brief reference to the relations of Jews 
and of Christians with India. Our author cites the 
fact of the deportation of the people of Israel into 
Media, by Salmanasar, in the year 719 before Christ, 
and of the people of Judaea by Nabuchodonosor, in 
606 and 588, into the various parts of his vast empire. 
The colony of black Jews at Cochin dates from this 
epoch. Claude Buchanan says that the black Jews 
in the interior of Malayala have a copy of the Pen- 
tateuch, written on a roll of leather, patched where 
worn with parchment, and that the Jews in China 
have several on soft flexible leather of a red color. 
Also, Artaxerxes (b. C. 464-424) styles himself "the 
great king who rules from India to Ethiopia," 
and Darius the Mede orders all the empire " to fear 
and respect the God of Daniel." It is not strange, 
therefore, that the ideas and even practices of the Jews 
should have been adopted by the Asiatics, not only in 
the countries mentioned but elsewhere, for ideas follow 
commerce and immigration. As for the relations of 
Christians with Asia, there are many documents exist- 
ing to show that, as is most fully made evident in the 
book before us. 

THE RELIGIOUS SYSTEM OF THIBET. 

Perhaps most capital is made against us of Lamaism 
in Thibet, its close resemblance to the organization of 
the Roman Catholic Church, in the temporal power of 



the Mosaic Writings. 



375 



the Grand Lama, and in its monastic institutions, and 
its manner of chanting and its ceremonies. Let us see 
what history tells us. In 1176 the Grand Khan of 
the Tartnrs, Thogruel-Ung-Khan, who was a Christian, 
wrote to Pope Alexander III., and the Pope answered 
on the 28th of September, 1 177. Gengis-Khan (a. d. 
1203) had Christians, Jews, and Mohammedans at his 
court. In 1245 Pope Innocent IV. sent Dominican 
and Franciscan missioners to Tartary. St. Louis, A.D. 
1249, received an embassy from that country, and he 
sent, both in that year and in 1253, embassies of 
Dominicans and of Franciscans to the Khans. After 
the death of Mangou-Khan, Kublai-Khan, or Tchi- 
Tsou, succeeded him. Mr. T. W. Rhys Davids, LL.D. 
(Encyclopedia Britannica, art. "Lamaism"), tells us 
that he " became a convert to the Buddhism of the 
Thibetan Lamas. He granted to the abbot of the 
Sakya monastery in southern Thibet the title of 
tributary sovereign of the country, head of the Bud- 
dhist church, and overlord over the numerous barons 
and abbots, and in return was officially crowned by the 
abbot as ruler over the extensive domain of the Mon- 
gol empire." Of this Monseigneur Laouenan thus 
speaks: " After the death of Mangou-Khan, Koublai, or 
Tchi-Tsou, succeeded, A.D. 1260. This prince added to 
his empire southern China, Tong-king, Cochin China, 
Pegu, and Thibet. It was he who raised to the royal 
dignity the Bodidharma, or living Buddha ; and as the 
one who was living then was a Thibetan, Koublai as- 
signed him a principality in Thibet, with the title of 
Dalai-Lama, or supreme Lama." He then quotes 
Rohrbacher (Hist. Church, vol. xix., p. 123) to show 



376 Brahmanism and the Mosaic Writings. 

that in the countries contiguous to Thibet at that 
time Christians were numerous, and that the cere- 
monies, altars, ornaments, and paintings of the Catholic 
Church were in use among them. It is no wonder, 
then, that just as the Mithraic worship of Rome copied 
the Christian rites, the Buddhists of Thibet and else- 
where made use of what they saw among their Chris- 
tian neighbors. 

We have given here but a meagre account of the 
valuable work of the Vicar- Apostolic of Pondicherry. 
We cannot praise it too highly ; nor will he be flat- 
tered by the praise, for he has gone to Him whose 
religion he valiantly and ably defended in this skeptical 
age. We recommend the careful study of the book 
to our young men, and hope that soon a translation 
will put it within the reach of those who do not 
understand French. May it serve to stimulate some 
able and thoroughly equipped missioners of India to 
form an association for the further and yet more com- 
plete study of the writings of the Hindus, that God's 
truth may dispel the clouds which still remain, and 
shine forth with all the brilliancy of the noon-day sun ! 



THE END. 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Dec. 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 
(724)779-21111 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




014 673 918 , 



